Here is the weather forecast: A large front is developing, preceded by fog.

The fog is expected to be widespread and persistent.

Older viewers may recall a similar severe weather system that developed in 2003, when visibility was impaired for many weeks.

It was the fog of war. It lingered over the Gulf states, was the trigger point for the Iraq War, and led to hundreds of thousands of casualties.

Viewers will also recall that in the midst of that fog were Weapons of Mass Destruction or WMDs. Forecasters at the time predicted massive damage if they were activated.

The forecasters then were wrong. The WMDs did not exist. The meteorologists had placed far too much reliance on data provided by a single source. It was called Curveball and analysts had taken its information at face value. In May 2004 the New York Times published a fulsome mea culpa, admitting it had taken official and other sources at face value and had failed to check their veracity. Three months later the Washington Post apologised to readers for being “overly credulous” and published a 3000-word article exposing its lapses in reporting and editing.

One might have thought that experience would have made all of us wary of information from sources fixated on particularly nasty weather. It has certainly been burned into the consciousness of journalists, who have been less trusting (at least of the White House and the Pentagon) ever since.

But too many people still put their faith in the hands of foggy forecasters. Continue reading “Today’s forecast: More fog of war approaching” →