So let’s talk about the weather…

The typical scenario nowadays is to have some local TV weather person come on to “play” with the morning show and do the weather, or – even worse – to have someone from a weather service read the forecast in a boring monotone, with way too much information.  “Clear to partly cloudy today with a thirty percent chance of showers or thundershowers, and a high in the mid-fifties.  Southerly winds 8-10 miles per hour.  Then it’ll become mostly cloudy and windy overnight with a sixty percent chance of more precipitation, and a low around 32,” etc.  Ugh.

We should do the weather, but ultra-short-form.  “Some clouds today with a chance of rain.  High of 54.  Tonight, no rain, low near 32.”

High today, low tonight, tell me if it’s going to rain or snow.  If you want, add tomorrow’s high.

No temperature “ranges” (like “in the low thirties.”  Should I bring the plants in tonight?  Some live at 33, but die at 32.)
Either pick a number, or say “near 32.”  NOT “about” or “around” 32.  Do you KNOW, or not?  We don’t want to just sound like we’re guessing.  And if you say “Low near 32” but it doesn’t reach that, then God changed it.  But at least we knew what it was supposed to be. )

Frankly, except for “It might rain today.  86 for the high,” is all you need, instead of a formal forecast.

Here’s why:

It’s not 1988 anymore.  I have the Weather Channel app in my phone – with the radar picture from RIGHT ABOVE MY HOUSE.  And I can get that, along with all the other pertinent information, in about 5 seconds.  THAT’S what you’re competing with.

NOTE: when there are concerning changes in the weather, of COURSE you want to cover it.  I’m just talking about not pouring energy into formal, lengthy forecasts that can’t compete with an iPhone.