The April 26 Severe Weather "Bust" Was a Communications Wake-up Call. Here's What We Learned

April 26, 2016 was a busy severe weather day from the central and southern plains into the Ohio Valley, with nearly 500 reports of tornadoes, large hail, severe wind reports, and wind damage. The severe weather was well-forecast, with outlooks highlighting the predominant hazards and focusing attention on the highest threat areas nearly a week in advance. Comparing the National Weather Service’s outlook areas to the severe weather reports indicates that, according to the numbers, the forecast verified quite well.

But while the forecast could be viewed as a success from a statistical perspective, from a communication perspective it was considered a bust. The perception - both within and outside the weather enterprise - was that the event did not live up to the high expectations driven by the stream of weather information that had preceded it by more than a week. Communication for the event by media and the National Weather Service included words like “outbreak” and “historic”. The result was an ever-escalating collective message that built anticipation for an extreme and potentially deadly tornado outbreak. The actual event did not live up to the hype.

The day raised many questions within the weather enterprise and the emergency management community - including schools that decided to cancel class well before thunderstorms even developed. Was the forecast a bust? Was this an outbreak? Was it historic? Was the heightened level of urgency and concern conveyed by many in the weather enterprise warranted?

We will review the evolution of the event from a communications perspective, examining how the message evolved in the days and hours leading up to the event, with a focus on keywords, phrases and communication methods that may have contributed to unrealistic expectations and describe future methodologies.