Question for the tv mets

[robbielyn]

When it is obvious that a storm has shifted from the forecast track and is obvious to any weather ethusiast let alone a pro met, is it frustrating to say: "According to the official forecast track the storm is moving wnw at 10 miles an hour" when latest info suggests it's moving nnw at 8 but you are forced to say what the latest nhc track states rather than giving us up to the minute realtime info. I mean you are experts in weather like dr's are experts in medicine and do their diagnosing of pt's while you diagnose or forecast weather. Just curious not trying to start a coup de tat or anything.

[Cryomaniac]

(bear in mind I'm no pro met) I kind of see the point, but I guess the thing is that since the NHC is the offical body, they have to use that info, or if they don't they need to use a disclaimer of some kind, which no-one likes doing.

[linkerweather]

I have no problem making a statement if it is obvious. Keep in mind the track from the NHC is issued every 6 hours, so alot can change. YEsterday, for example, I mentioned that NOEL was already south of the "center line" as it was moving west across CUBA early in the morning. But, with that said, I value the NHC and the NWS for that matter so would never publicly disrepect it. On a similar note, I have gone on air with thunderstorms worthy of breaking in that weren't officially warned and on the flip side have had no problem mentioning a storm was no longer severe despite the warning continuing.

[Frank2]

It's an awkward situation for those in media, since they have already brought (hyped) the situation up to a certain level, but, finding out that either the storm has sudden weakened or has changed course away from their local area, they are now in a position of being forced to either tell the truth, or, as I've seen it happen many times, they will gradually (over a few hours) change the tone of the reporting to show that indeed the situation has changed for the better...

It happened a number of times during my stay at the NHC, and, having heard of a forecast change, some would just pack up their tents and leave within 30 minutes of hearing this sudden development, but, others would be told to linger for the dramatic effect of one more live shot before the truth was told (as one reporter told us in a similar situation, "Well, time for me to go back outside and look wet").

Lying, well, yes, it is, but, some would say it's just the "nature" of their business, especially when it comes to ratings...

When it comes to that way of thinking, I worry about my niece - she being a Journalism major...

P.S. This is not to imply that those who work at the NHC have anything to do with the above, since they do not have control over the media...

[robbielyn]

I have no problem making a statement if it is obvious. Keep in mind the track from the NHC is issued every 6 hours, so alot can change. YEsterday, for example, I mentioned that NOEL was already south of the "center line" as it was moving west across CUBA early in the morning. But, with that said, I value the NHC and the NWS for that matter so would never publicly disrepect it. On a similar note, I have gone on air with thunderstorms worthy of breaking in that weren't officially warned and on the flip side have had no problem mentioning a storm was no longer severe despite the warning continuing.

Hey Josh, thanks for replying. I don't think anyone would publicly disrespect the nhc or nws and I wasn't trying to ask if anyone felt that way. I have just seen mets so many times state the "official" NHC track and windspeed as if they are bound to do so like you can't use your expertise to make your own official updated track when it is obvious that things have indeed taken a sudden turn. It's like they have the final say so on what's happening and you're not allowed to say from our computer data "Named Storm" has increased to over "so many miles" in the last three hours and now it's evident the track has changed and so it will affect "named area" instead of the original "named area". I guess I want to know why you all have to have defer to the NHC. Oh well it is just curiousity and nothing more. Anyways congrats on BayNews9 having dualpole doppler technology now. The only one in florida and only 1 of 6 other cities having it, including chicago and nyc. I bet the other stations will be hurrying up and spend the money getting it. You all are the first and so must be very proud. Now you have a new "toy" to play with lol. It's pretty neat seeing the radar showing hail and snow in the upper atmosphere and to be able to see the size of raindrops. This will definitely help mets be able to be alot more precise as to where severe weather will form.

[linkerweather]

Yeah, we are really excited about it. Lots to see. Can't wait for next summer!