Put out the light, and then put out the light

I woke today to find the news agenda had been turned upside down - quite literally. Instead of the morning bulletins forging ahead with word of a turbo-charged NHS bug, the day's political prelude or more binge drinkers, the top story for Monday the 10th of March was the weather.

I know weather is, for all intents and purposes, the only reason why many listeners tune into radio or television...but leading the bulletin? Surely this had gone too far.

However, they ARE calling it the most powerful storm to hit Britain in a number of years.

And that's probably why I'm seeking refuge in the blogger-sanctuary of the media centre. I've been here for 10 hours already - but no amount of prime time television or home cooked dinners could tempt me into braving the evening's rain and gale.

That said, there IS a point to this blog. And it DOES relate to dumb news.

With all this talk of extreme weather and climate change, I spoke to my climatologist flatmate about how serious the problem actually is - little did I know she would launch into an attack on dumb news.

As it turns out, the geographical world is distressed that the general public is not taking global warming as seriously as they should - and attributes this lack of knowledge to climate change coverage in the media.

On an expedition to the Met Office in Exeter last week, she described the alterations made between the documents and statistics the meteorological scientists hand the press office and what the press office deliver to their on-air presenters.

For example, "global mean temperature anomalies" became "global average temperatures". A rather technical argument on the difference between means, medians and averages ensued (far too taxing for my GCSE maths-level brain).

Also, the Met press office took liberally to rounding up decimal points... apparently there's quite a difference between a 0.3 degrees warming increase and a half a degree increase.

Not only does this information float over my head, but I'm not particularly worried about it. This called for a more in-depth discussion with my flatmate about the benefits to journalists of being skilled enough with climatology terminology to distinguish scientific truths. After all, if the journalist isn't concerned, how on earth are they going to get the right level of distress across to viewers?

So, shouldn't the most listened-to news of the day be the one prioritised in terms of accuracy? Surely, if it's a case of the public not understanding meteorological terminology, the media should make a point of turning climate change jargon into vernacular.

I feel quite strongly that in terms of global warming - which is undoubtedly one of the most pertinent issues in both our current society and our future reality - there are sectors of news we just cannot afford to dumb down.

For all the times I’ve been harassed for leaving my thermostat on during the day or been given a nasty stare for not contributing at all to the recycling in my flat - I think I’m pretty fortunate that the global-warming wake-up call came from so close to home. After all, the issue is close to all of us.

That said... generations may have to pass before I give up on my naive belief that, by leaving my Christmas lights up all-year-round, my life will be exponentially more festive.