News1 min ago
Just Watching The News At 11 On Bbc News 24
22 Answers
This is UK right? So why have they spent the first 7 minutes on North American weather? Surely there is something going on here? US weather may warrant a 30 second mention at the bottom of the order but not top billing. The US news barely mentions anything in the outside world.
Answers
There isn't much going on here, and the fact that the US news never mentions anything outside the US is what makes our news better than theirs.
00:29 Sun 25th Dec 2022
https:/
It's -45° which is more like Arctic temperatures.
It's -45° which is more like Arctic temperatures.
I can think of at least two reasons. Primarily, freak weather conditions are part of the major narrative of climate change, which affects us all. Secondly, this is the sort of natural disaster that does get reported on, wherever it is, because we are all human, inhabiting the same planet. Then there is the early warning aspect - some remnants of this event are likely to be with us in a few days
bhg481 - // Everybody knows that the UK is the only country in the entire world whose transport system is affected by bad weather. The rest of the world is able to carry on normally when the weather gets bad but a single snowflake on London is sufficient to close our capital city. //
This is a common response whenever bad weather paralyses our transport systems.
The difficulty is, the other countries you mention have routine periods of bad weather sufficient to impact of transport, which means they are justified in spending on large amounts of resources to combat such eventualities, safe in the knowledge that they will be required, and justify the expense of providing them.
The UK weather is nowhere near as predictable as that.
Therefore, we cannot invest in large amounts of bad weather resources which may sit largely idle for all but occasional days in any given year, the outlay would simply not be justified.
That means that on occasions when we do experience severe weather, and overall it is nowhere near as much as the other countries in your comparison, then yes we are under-prepared, and forced to play 'catch-up' but that is still more economically sound and effective, than planning with expensive hardware and manpower that may not be called on for anything more than a day or two, if at all.
This is a common response whenever bad weather paralyses our transport systems.
The difficulty is, the other countries you mention have routine periods of bad weather sufficient to impact of transport, which means they are justified in spending on large amounts of resources to combat such eventualities, safe in the knowledge that they will be required, and justify the expense of providing them.
The UK weather is nowhere near as predictable as that.
Therefore, we cannot invest in large amounts of bad weather resources which may sit largely idle for all but occasional days in any given year, the outlay would simply not be justified.
That means that on occasions when we do experience severe weather, and overall it is nowhere near as much as the other countries in your comparison, then yes we are under-prepared, and forced to play 'catch-up' but that is still more economically sound and effective, than planning with expensive hardware and manpower that may not be called on for anything more than a day or two, if at all.
Bhg - You didn't say the same as me at all.
You said the the country stops when it snows, something everyone knows.
My extra words were used to provide an explanation, which was missing from your post - so not the same thing in fewer words at all.
There is no virtue in using fewer words, if all you are doing is stating the obvious.
You said the the country stops when it snows, something everyone knows.
My extra words were used to provide an explanation, which was missing from your post - so not the same thing in fewer words at all.
There is no virtue in using fewer words, if all you are doing is stating the obvious.
