I completely agree with your comments about what TV weathercasting SHOULD be all about. I have spent the last 32 years of my life studying weather, caring about weather, attending A.M.S. conferences and workshops, and doing whatever I could to further the profession.
However, what I have observed about the profession after 22 years on the air is that the people who hire and fire us don't share our passion. Their primary consideration is ratings, not Meteorology. Very few News Directors have taken courses in Meteorology. Most, in fact, have a background in Journalism. They have to answer to General Managers who often have a background in sales. And these GMs have to answer to higher-ups who are businessmen, not scientists.
So, while I share your passion 100%, the fact remains that non-meteorologists WILL be hired to present the weather on TV, and I would rather see these folks get some education in the science than go on with "no clue" because they are "good communicators" or have "personality".
Over the course of my career I have suffered through countless bogus weather explanations by weather "communicators" who are just "faking it". This is, unfortunately, part of the "dumbing down" of our world. It is frustrating, it is sad, and unfortunately, it is not going away.
The point of my earlier comments wasn't to condone the decisions that are made by news management, but to point out that our frustrations come from a different vision we have of what our profession should be about.
I still believe we need to expend more energy to explain to News Directors and General Managers the importance of hiring professional Meteorologists whenever possible. And in cases where that isn't possible, to at least encourage the "personalities" to get as much education as possible - and if that means MSU, so be it.
RE: A.M.S. enforcement of the term "Meteorologist". This comes down to a legal "Catch 22". Since Meteorology isn't a licensed profession, like Law, Real Estate, or Engineering, there is really no legal way the A.M.S. can do anything to stop someone from calling themselves a Meteorologist. The answer is to push for legislation to require state licensing.
This still won't insure that news managers will hire meteorologists, but at least it will clear up the use of the term.
John, I would like to refer you to my paper The First 100 Tapes, referenced elsewhere on this site. The frustration I experienced on the Board and still experience as a tape reviewer is that there is still very little of meteorological value being demonstrated on the air, even by those with the A.M.S. Seal. That is, in most cases, I still can't tell the Meteorologists from the "communicators" by just watching their shows.
And, if I can't see any difference, then the public can't tell the difference, and the News Directors aren't going to tell the difference, and we are still stuck in this very frustrating situation.
Tom Loffman
Aug. 16, 1998