The Federal Government says it is “ridiculous” that the Met Office is talking about rebranding amid flooding in eastern states, as it is revealed the cost of the agency’s move is more than $220,000.
Key Points:
- The cost has included the development of drop-down banners and system updates
- The Met Office wants to be called by its full name or ‘the office’ for short, not ‘meteorological office’ or ‘BOM’
- The ABC, an emergency broadcaster, has not updated its style guide to reflect the changes
Yesterday, the Met Office asked the media to update its style guides to stop calling it ‘the weather office’ and ‘BOM’ – although its own mobile app is still called ‘weather GOOD”.
Instead, he asked that it be called the Bureau of Meteorology in the first instance and “the office” in subsequent references.
The request was mocked on social media and angered at least some Met Office staff, who saw it as a waste of resources and a self-inflicted public relations disaster for an agency that does vital work. importance, especially during natural disasters.
The rebranding exercise had been in the works for more than 18 months and Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek demanded to know how much money had been spent on it.
A breakdown provided by the weather bureau to the federal government puts the total cost at $220,296.
A $118,177 contract was awarded for “brand strategy and design,” which included things like research, visual styling, and the logo.
$69,300 was allocated to another agency for “communication and implementation planning support,” while $32,819 was spent on so-called “implementation costs.”
Those costs include developing pop-up banners, which are often used at community and media events, and “design support” to update “systems and tools.”
Tanya Plibersek says the brand overhaul began under the former government. (ABC News: Ian Cutmore)
After publishing the breakdown, Ms Plibersek said: “Australians will make up their own minds about what they call” the Bureau of Meteorology.
“What matters is accurate and timely weather information for communities, especially during severe weather like we’re experiencing right now,” he added.
“That’s where my focus is. People are suffering, lives are at risk.
“It’s ridiculous that the BOM is talking about rebranding.”
The ABC style guide has not been updated
In its first note to the media on Tuesday, the Met Office suggested the rebranding was in line with “the Meteorology Act 1955” and was intended to help ensure information from the agency was shared, understood and acted upon.
In an additional statement Tuesday afternoon, a spokesperson added:
“Until now, our name and visual identity have been expressed differently across content and channels. Feedback from a wide range of stakeholders has been that this variability can sometimes negatively impact effectiveness of our messages”.
The ABC, an emergency broadcaster, has not updated its style guide.
ABC language editorial adviser Tiger Webb said the proposal would be formally discussed next month.
“We would like to reflect widespread use or easy understanding, and so far the proposed change does not seem popular,” he added.
“It has the additional hurdle that there appears to be no firm justification for the change: the BOM is widely used and understood, the 1955 act that the press release mentioned is entirely arcane to the public and uses a different name anyway, and most of the public components of the office (eg its website and mobile app) still use BOM.”