Misleading headline
Forum rules
These topics are a read-only archive and may be subject to out-of-date information.
For today's weather discussion head to: New Zealand Weather & Climate
These topics are a read-only archive and may be subject to out-of-date information.
For today's weather discussion head to: New Zealand Weather & Climate
-
Philip Duncan
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Mon 27/08/2007 21:02
- Location: Waitakere City
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: Misleading headline
I think the main issue is that a lot of journos simply don't understand the basic weather mechanics. To them terms like "weather bomb" just means "dramatic or violent weather". In fact I'd say many New Zealanders have no idea "weather bomb" actually has a scientific explanation behind it. Definitely some headlines are misleading but I'm sure many journalists have integrity and just simply get "confused" with what is record breaking.
-
Inny Binny
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Sat 01/09/2007 12:15
- Location: Prebbleton
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Misleading headline
They are misleading to weather enthusiasts, but come on - think. They are not misleading to the public, because 'weather bomb' is simply used as a colloquial term to refer to severe weather. The public ain't gonna go 'the pressure dropped 24 hPa in 24 hours? WOW!' - they are going to go 'oh gosh not more severe weather'. The public have one definition of a weatehr bomb - that it means severe weather. And in the context that journalists use - this is exactly right.
And therefore if journalists and the public are both using the term in its colloquial form, then there clearly is no misunderstanding or misleading to or from anywhere. The public think the term (and others, of course) means something that it really actually does mean within the context.
('Record-breaking' has the same meaning whatever field you come from however, so you could call that a bit misleading - the above is a general statement)
And therefore if journalists and the public are both using the term in its colloquial form, then there clearly is no misunderstanding or misleading to or from anywhere. The public think the term (and others, of course) means something that it really actually does mean within the context.
('Record-breaking' has the same meaning whatever field you come from however, so you could call that a bit misleading - the above is a general statement)
-
Manukau heads obs
- Posts: 12305
- Joined: Mon 10/03/2003 16:30
- Location: West Coast Road, Manukau Peninsula, North Island
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: Misleading headline
record breaking too though depends on the period of time...
it could be a record for 1 year period, i.e the most since the begining of the year
rain events on the west coast of the SI are normaly only 200 to 300mm (sure they can be 500mm + as well, but not as often)
this event, because its slow moving, has resulted in big totals, the biggest this year...so there is a record broken.,.,,this years record...
it could be a record for 1 year period, i.e the most since the begining of the year
rain events on the west coast of the SI are normaly only 200 to 300mm (sure they can be 500mm + as well, but not as often)
this event, because its slow moving, has resulted in big totals, the biggest this year...so there is a record broken.,.,,this years record...
