This is how the new BBC weather service opens now that MeteoGroup have taken up the contract (fig 1). In the many hundreds of articles that I have written for this blog, I always try my best to attribute the source of any of the data, images or maps that I use out of common courtesy. So why is it that the BBC can’t do the same thing? They don’t seem to mind doing it with the shipping forecast on Radio Four:-
“This is the shipping forecast issued by the Met Office, on behalf of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, at 0505 today, Saturday the 10th of February 2018…”
So why don’t the BBC do the same thing in the national weather forecast? We know that warnings will continue to be issued by the Met Office, but are just left guessing about the source of model data MeteoGroup are using in their TV forecasts.
Why is it so important?
The reason it is important that we know, is that in the future an unexpected weather event occur may occur that was much more severe than was forecast, and blame will be apportioned. Because in the past it was always easy to lay that blame at the feet of the Met Office, it’s now a lot more complicated. It’s not the fault of the presenters because they are employed by the BBC and are really just the messengers, it really lies with MeteoGroup choice of forecast model with which they produce that poor forecast with. So knowing where that forecast data came from is important, because as far as I know MeteoGroup have full access to forecast data from a number of different sources, including the American (GFS), European (ECMWF), and the UKMO models.
Credit where credit’s due
The solution is simple, in the opening credits the BBC should indicate which model data MeteoGroup have used to produce that particular forecast with – credit where credit’s due (figs 2 & 3). Who knows MeteoGroup could pick and choose from day-to-day which model they favour, and if they don’t choose to use the UKMO model it’s not inconceivable that the forecast data is out of synch with any warnings issued by the Met Office.