Followers Beware: Tweets on Seemingly Inevitable Storms Often Wrong

This morning provided another reminder that, in our eyes at least, tweeting meteorologists are putting too much predictive emphasis on emerging radar echoes and, in their efforts to be precise, forgetting that storms die out, rebuild and change directions. At a minimum, they'd be wise to at least use more cautionary wording like "may" or "if it holds together" when discussing the movement of storms seemingly headed for the metro.

This morning, Sven Sundgaard detailed with seeming certainty the arrival of morning storms per the graphic below. With our hopelessly untrained eye, we looked at the radar shortly after 7 and wondered if that would actually happen. For one, the storms were a relatively long way away (though moving very quickly) and it seemed puzzling that one could speak with such certainty given the distance the storms still had to travel. For the fun of it, we tweeted close to 8 a.m. that we had our doubts. But it wasn't until close to 9 a.m. that Sven acknowledged that the storms indeed were going to miss the most of the metro.

Tweet issued at 7:07 a.m.

Amateur tweet at 7:59 a.m.

Tweet issued at 8:44 a..m.

Conversely, we did note that Jonathan Yuhas, whose tweets were off the mark during the day and evening of the U2 concert employed wording that acknowledged merely the possibility of storms arriving in the metro.

 It's baffling to us why many forecasters continue to make pronouncements of impending storms in such certain terms, particularly when storms are still a decent distance away. Why not use tweets to put us on alert and then communicate with more certainty when storms are truly on the doorstep. Doesn't that make more sense?

Remember,  you can follow The Minnesota Forecaster on Twitter and like us on Facebook. 

Future Scan vs. Reality: How Did It Stack Up for KARE11 Sunday Night?

Future scan, or "future radar" as some weather outlets call it, has increased in popularity over the last several years. Yet we've always wondered how future radar verifies. A tweet from KARE11's Sven Sundgaard detailed the future radar for 11:39 (the tweet was issued at 10:40 so the "future" in this case was about one hour). Here is how the future scan appeared (click here for actual depiction):

Here is TMF's screen capture of KARE11 radar's actual scan at 11:40:

Finally, for good measure, here's a radar scan from Wunderground.com at about the same time:

In our opinion, while the future scan reasonably communicated the essence of the storm movement -- and therefore did provide a service, the future scan did not account for the heavier showers that persisted on the north side of the Twin Cities. A big deal? Probably not in this case. But we think that given the inherent unpredictability of summer storms, it can be risky business to provide an image that suggests an all-knowing future.

How would you assess the effectiveness of KARE11's future radar and the concept of future radar in general? Leave your comments below.

Remember,  you can follow The Minnesota Forecaster on Twitter and like us on Facebook.

Tuesday Night/Wednesday Snow Watch

As of Sunday night, there is some consensus among local forecasters that a significant snow event (for April, anyway) is on the way. Check out our spreadsheet to see the progressive forecasts leading up to Tuesday evening.
The most striking prediction to us was the confidence displayed by normally conservative KARE11 in predicting a significant snow event. WCCO continues to show models with projected snow amounts that they don't really agree with, which doesn't make any sense to us considering theirs is a visual medium and some people watch with the sound down.

Normally conservative KARE11 is bullish on the storm.

This screenshot suggests Mike Fairbourne is predicting 9.1" of snow. But that's not actually what he said.

Dave Dahl says Tuesday night's storm will be similar to Friday night's.

(Midday update)
We'll provide a forecaster recap later tonight for the possible snowstorm Tuesday night and Wednesday. At this juncture, there appears to be considerable variance in what forecasters are thinking. KSTP is poo pooing any chance of real snow (instead forecasting primarily rain) while others such as  KARE (per tweet from Sven Sundgaard) see either snow or no precip at all.

Here are a few comments we found on Sunday morning:

@svensundgaard
Biting my finger nails... lots of possibilities with this Tuesday storm, could be lots of snow, or does it head south and we're just cold?

@novakweather
I will not be surprised if a foot or more of snow falls over so. and/or central MN by noon Wed.

Steve Frazier, KSTP, 6 a.m. update
"I think the accumulating snow is pretty much behind us. Some rain showers on Tuesday and Wednesday that could get a little flaky from time to time."

Strib Weather Column
The models agree on the timing of the next storms (late Tuesday through midday Wednesday), but not the amounts. The range: 4-14", give or take a foot. Throw out the highest and lowest values and you still wind up with a midrange prediction in the 4"+ range. We'll see. It's still (very) early to be attaching inch-amounts to the forecast. Could it be "plowable"? Absolutely.

From the TMF Soapbox: A Weather Watcher's Bill of Rights

While TMF doesn’t presuppose it’s speaking for the weather watchers of the world, let alone those residing in the country’s second coldest state, we’d like to set a few expectations for Minnesota’s weathercasters. We’d love to hear your thoughts.

1. Use social media for all it’s worth. It doesn’t take an expert futurist to see that local television news broadcasts – indeed the concept of watching the news at a particular time of day on a big screen – are going the way of the dinosaur. Providing timely information in an electronic space is both “good weather” and, alas, good marketing. In our market, we’ve noticed that KSTP has escalated its commitment to providing timely, online updates with new video forecasts that are announced through tweets and Facebook updates. This makes good sense: Why should we have to stay up to watch a forecast when a new has already been developed. There are forecasters in our area, such as NovakWeather, who provide their services solely through non-traditional media.

2. Be consistent in the media you employ. The weather information provided on television or radio should match what’s posted on your website. There’s nothing worse than dialing up your favorite station's website only to see Friday’s forecast posted front and center when it’s Sunday. Worse yet, is when the site shows the morning forecast (which might not mention any possibility of storms) when an evening forecast has just been shown on TV that is markedly different.

3. Walk the talk. Keep information on your electronic media current. If you’re going to say “check out our website for the latest weather information whenever you’re on the go,” please live up to your end of the bargain.

4. Employ confidence ratings in your forecasts. Everyone knows that some forecasts are more slam dunks than others – or as the weather gurus might say sometimes there’s “model agreement” and sometimes there isn’t. The phrase, “I gotta tellya, this forecast has big bust potential,” are words we should hear a bit more often.

5. Dare to be different! It’s no secret that weathercasters (indeed, the public) has access to the same large universe of weather model information. We wouldn’t suggest that the Geico gecko could predict the weather, but it’s easy to become routine and formulaic in your approach. Use a hunch now and then, and stick yourself out. Sure, you may miss a forecast (and pay dearly on TMF – that’s a joke), but if you explain your reasoning, we admire it. For example, when studying the various forecasts for the long-range predictions of the first major cold wave, we noted that KSTP’s temperature prediction stood out like a sore thumb from the consensus. In the end, they had the best prediction by far.

6. Be creative. Present information in a fresh and unorthodox way. It’s more entertaining for the viewer or reader, and can be a better way to illustrate a concept. Our favorite weather site, the Capital Weather Gang, provides rather unique forecasts when snow is in the offing. Here’s an excellent example of a logical, yet uncommon, way to depict possible storm outcomes:

Here’s an excerpt from the blog entry:

Here are the current accumulation possibilities that will certainly evolve in the next several days:

30% chance: A dusting or less

30% chance: A dusting to 1"

20% chance: 1-5"

20% chance: 5"+

To us, this should be a standard tactic in communicating weather scenarios.

7. Give us the love all the time. Yes, the interest in weather is much higher when severe summer storms threaten and when mighty blizzards are aiming in our direction. You should be all over that, both because it affects the most people and because it reflects your presumed love and passion for weather. But if it’s 9 in the morning and a surprise, post-newscast storm has suddenly popped up that will threaten an outdoor lunch or a golf outing, get the word out! There’s real, practical value there, though it may not make for sexy headlines. Finally, weather doesn’t take the weekend off, and neither should weekend weather updates.           

8. Send your written forecasts past a proofreader. There’s no reason to think that a meteorologist specializing in science knowledge is necessarily going to be a good writer, but as long as information is provided through a literary medium, please check your spellings and the flow of your phrases and sentences. Ultimately, your business is detail-based and sloppiness in communication suggests potential sloppiness in the way you go about your job.

9. Present information every six hours (online). Why every six hours? Because that’s how often the key weather models are run. The schedule of television news broadcasts shouldn’t be the governing force behind how often you present information.

10. Spare the gimmicks. Do we really need to know that Johnny’s parents wrote in to find out the forecast for his birthday party in Glenwood on Saturday? In our mind, a better change of pace is to employ a small science presentation. KARE’s Sven Sundgaard’s “Simply Science” segment is a good example.

11. Forgo the misleading teases. Don't allow the news anchor to say, "Snow is coming our way tomorrow," and be left having to explain that distant Mankato or southern Minnesota may get a coating of snow. It’s insulting to us and puts the weathercaster in an instant uphill battle for credibility.

12. Tell us when you blew it. People dig honesty and it’s the best way to earn long-term credibility. If a forecast was missed, don’t skip over it or pretend it didn’t happen. Tell us why it happened – and that you’ll never make the mistake again. (Insert joking smiley face here.)

13. Accurate forecasts. Notice we put this one last? While ultimately, of course, this is what matters most, it’s really part of the whole way that a weather outlet should communicate with its followers. We believe that a well-explained and well-reasoned forecast is simply good communication. And that in the end, people may remember the way you communicate as much as the accuracy of your forecast. That’s our feeling, anyway.

Agree or disagree with these ideas? Please share your thoughts.