Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

deminks

(11,014 posts)
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:46 AM Dec 2012

Forecasting Denial: Why Are TV Weathercasters Ignoring Climate Change?

(snip)

The biggest problem is that most weathercasters are not scientists at all – they just play one on TV. Only half of on-air weathercasters have advanced credentials – often in "broadcast meteorology," a dumbed-down, made-for-TV version of the degree. The rest, like The Today Show's Al Roker, are just TV stars with colorful personalities. And thanks to increasingly sophisticated forecasting technology, you don't need to know much about cloud dynamics to get the job done. "I've never known a meteorologist to get promoted for his or her forecasting skill," says a former network news producer who asked not to be identified.

Nor do weathercasters need to know much about how greenhouse gases are altering the atmosphere to get a coveted stamp of approval from the American Meteorological Society, the gold standard for weathercasters. "There is no requirement for the AMS certification to know anything about climate science," says Jeff Masters, the co-founder and chief meteorologist at Weather Underground, an Internet weather site that is known for its aggressive coverage of climate change. In fact, the AMS itself has been slow to embrace the latest science on global warming. In public statements, the society has long played up uncertainties and natural causes for the earth's warming. Only last August did the AMS finally admit that warming is "unequivocal" and that human beings are "the dominant cause."

Another problem is corporate politics. "Most local TV stations are owned by large corporations like Gannett or Scripps," says Terry Kelly, a former weathercaster and CEO of the forecasting company Weather Central. "Many of these owners have a conservative political bent, and tend to be climate skeptics." At some, like Fox News, the influence is explicit. Others, like the Weather Channel – which is co-owned by Mitt Romney's old firm, Bain Capital – avoided dealing with the issue by simply shutting down its entire climate unit in 2008. "The influence is rarely direct," says a weathercaster who works for a Scripps-owned station. "But it's just clear that if you want to say or do something about climate change, you need to be very careful, because you are likely to hear about it from upstairs."

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/forecasting-denial-why-are-tv-weathercasters-ignoring-climate-change-20121205#ixzz2FEKfMmBT

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
1. You are correct. Most do not have the education to explain what is going on. Many do not even
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:48 AM
Dec 2012

understand it themselves.

Brickbat

(19,339 posts)
2. One of the best-known TV meterologists in this state is a self-described Republican who talks about
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:50 AM
Dec 2012

climate change and is mad at his peers (professional and political) who ignore it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-douglas/republican-climate-change_b_1374900.html

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
4. Not too sure it is their job to discuss climate change during a weather report, tho.
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:55 AM
Dec 2012

They have X number of minutes to do the forecast, except in the cases of severe weather when they have more time to discuss the impeding storms, and most people tune in to "the forecast" just to see what to wear/expect for the next few days.
Climate change is a subject that requires some indepth discussion, thus some time.

That said, the in depth discussion can be found by good meteoroligists such as Dr. Jeff Masters, online.

Put another way, I have NO expectations of anything substantive coming from tv networks anyhow, so know where to find serious
information elsewhere.

mother earth

(6,002 posts)
5. It's not just on climate change, on everything, journalism has reached a new low.
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 11:57 AM
Dec 2012

Facts & objectivity are no longer requirements for the media, our "newsworthy" topics are based on gossip and opinion.

I guess you can't have an oligarchy without shaping the minds and opinions of the 99% to your advantage.

PCIntern

(25,556 posts)
6. Shut down the climate unit, eh?
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:00 PM
Dec 2012

That'll do it...
Funny thing is, someone forgot to tell the Climate about that, methinks.

UTUSN

(70,711 posts)
7. For starters, it's the only job you can be wrong daily & still have a job, with a smile
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:12 PM
Dec 2012

Next, I had suspicions, when there's a potential weather threat that they sometimes overplay it, perhaps to get the public to take extra precautions, but possibly also to be able to say i-told-you-so if something goes really bad.

Scruffy Rumbler

(961 posts)
8. It pisses me off when they
Sun Dec 16, 2012, 12:12 PM
Dec 2012

give a forecast of unusually warm weather/ no snow for us in the north and call it a good day or a great weather. Sorry, no. It is lousy weather for us. No snow pack for the spring melt. Plants and animals stressed from the changing weather patterns. Damn its the middle of december and I have rose buds in my back yard and "annuals" still growing ! Upstate NY. Lower Adirondacks....

Got a dusting of snow this morning but supposed to change to rain tonight....damn....just damn

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Forecasting Denial: Why A...