Former senior BBC weatherman Bill Giles has said forecasters should be wary of acting like “nannies” with excessive weather warnings because it risks reducing their impact.
Bill, who led the BBC weather team for 17 years until he retired in 2000, said it felt like the public had been “inundated” with weather warnings over the winter and questioned whether it reduced how effective they were.
(Rebecca Naden/PA)
Writing in the Radio Times, he said viewers are no longer trusted to use their judgment, adding: “On frosty and snowy nights, does the forecaster really need to tell people to watch out on untreated roads and pavements?
“I think they could safely just mention the ice and expect viewers to use their common sense.”
He continued: “Of course, if the forecast is for exceptionally severe weather, which happens about once every five years, then due warnings and possible consequences must be given.
(Sean Dempsey/PA)
“But to do this with all of the dozen or so named winter storms risks making people immune to the warnings.
“And just because we’re now into spring, at least where weather forecasters are concerned, it doesn’t mean the warnings will stop.
“We have yet to get the summer thunderstorms and consequent flooding as well as a warning of impending heatwaves.
“So while we must consider the effects of severe weather on the population at large rather than just pure weather information, for weather warnings to be effective our forecasters must beware of behaving like nannies.”
Giles said he backed a system under which “only sensible warnings of the effects of bad weather, duly considered by all of the experts, would be given out when relevant and it would reduce the number of off-the-cuff remarks that happen today”.
He concluded with his own forecast for the weeks ahead, predicting mild weather and rain for March but with a chance of damaging frosts into April, adding: “Which, as a gardener, is the one weather warning I do really want to hear.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here