The Jargon of weather forecasters

It was reported in October 2005 that the Meteorological Office had issued guidelines on how to make a description of a weather forecast clearer and more understandable. Although some newspapers saw this as a "dumbing down" of information, the Plain English Campaign welcomed the emphasis on clarity.

The Times offered the same forecast written in the two (old and new) styles:

Although much of the reporting was tongue in cheek and scoffed at the new "positive" emphasis, the following extracts from the Times, quoting the report give a flavour of the new style.

'There is no need to dwell on a "small chance of showers" when "mainly dry" tells a better story. If there are "localised storms" then it must be "dry for most". Clouds over Manchester mean generally clear visibility for motorway drivers.'

'A Met Office spokesman said: "We are asking forecasters to think carefully about the language they use. If there is bad weater in a remote, relatively unpopulated part of Britain but it is mainly dry for the majority, the forecast should reflect that."

Outlook is suddenly brighter - the story as it appears in The Times.

• How do you judge whether a news story or weather forecast is positive or negative in its approach?
• Does it make a difference to our understanding?
• Is it possible to be neutral?
• Does it help to be positive?

There was once a Good News channel on US television which claimed only to present positive news.
• Do you think that is • possible? • advisable?
• Does it bias the news unacceptably?

• What linguistic techniques would you use to help a news or weather forecaster to present information in a positive way?