Yesterday: by early evening I thought we'd be doomed come Sunday, lost from view under a deluge of snow. A Met Office amber warning no less.
Today mid morning: off to a local cafe for mid morning coffee and cake before everyone else notices the roads are clear and the snow is what we'd have called disappointing when I were a youngster.
20 minutes later: people are now pouring into the cafe but we have the best seat. Peaceful while it lasted.
7 comments:
The ramping up of bad weather concerns is interesting, isn't it? I can understand meteorologists getting it wrong, because they are dealing with a very complex system of variables and prediction becomes almost impossible. But they always seem to claim the weather will be worse and more dramatic than it actually turns out to be.
Is this the "Michael Fish effect", where the Met Office doesn't want to underestimate the severity of impending weather systems? If so, it's an interesting question as to whether under- or over-playing the threat leads to greater loss of confidence and reputation. People are probably more inclined to forgive a lurid account that fails to materialise ("We were lucky!") than the complacency that leads one to fail to secure the kiddies' trampoline and damages the patio doors.
I'm more inclined to think it is part of the overall "emotionalisation" of information and services. Websites thrive according to the amount of clicks, and organisations learn that nothing lures clicks like an exciting tale of peril or triumph.
Quite slushy here.
I suspect that the "ramping up of bad weather concerns" was originally driven by global warming ideology. The habit of giving names to storms in the UK appeared at a time when the prevalent alarmist meme was "extreme weather", and elevating ordinary bad weather into named storms perfectly suited that narrative. However, the logic of bureaucracy is that once something has been started it must be continued forever even if everybody has forgotten why they are doing it. The logic of the media is that any minor thing that might potentially be exploited to create a dramatic story will be hyped to the skies until it actually does provide a dramatic story. A hundred years from now we'll probably be giving dramatic names to puddles.
We have had quite bad weather where I live. It has been snowing non-stop for 24 hours.
It was a bit of surprise, we have not had snow like this for many years!
"I'm more inclined to think it is part of the overall "emotionalisation" of information and services. "
Spot on Sam.
Giving storms 'names' is all part of it. The BBC love them, because they divert the real facts to the sort of fiction they spin these days.
Sam - you are probably right, the Met Office doesn't want to underestimate the severity of impending weather systems. I suspect the "emotionalisation" of information and services has always been with us but the balance has shifted and expanded. Books could probably be written about it.
James - crisp and thin here. Not enough for slush.
Andrew - I agree, it probably was originally driven by global warming ideology. Also a desire to raise the perceived value of Met Office services.
Cherry - not much here but I think it has been patchy even within Derbyshire with heavier falls in the north.
Scrobs - I agree, it's the way they tell it these days.
Post a Comment