Thank you. To answer your question, I think that it is much more difficult to scare people with weather predictions than in other types of stories because whether their predictions are right or wrong are easily measured. Accuracy in regular news stories is much more difficult to measure. Forecast Watch or Forecast Advisor are two excellent examples of this type of measurement.
As an average citizen, my daily weather interest lies in a general need to know for planning: e.g. watering the potted plants, or grabbing a rain jacket. I know that pleasure boating is best accomplished in the morning during summer, as t-storms are more likely to crop up in the afternoon. Living in the lightning capital of the U.S., this is how most of us plan outdoor activities.
I use internet radar access to fine tune my schedule around daily weather events. Detailed long range and short range radar are part of my daily routine. Anyone who can provide the most clear radar has my support. Currently, I use weatherunderground as a paid member.
Living in the lightning capital of the U.S. also means I am in hurricane territory. Hurricanes are the most labor and budget intensive weather events I experience because I own and live on waterfront property.
When a hurricane enters the Gulf of Mexico, I could boast 98% accuracy if I predict a storm will make landfall between Brownsville TX and Key West FL. If I recall correctly, the early Accuweather prediction for Katrina landfall was between Houston and Tampa. I would hardly call that a win for Accuweather. I saw an Accuweather graphic predicting the possibility of hurricanes from Browsnville to New England for the 2006 hurricane season--another case where Accuweather bragging rights are misplaced. Disaster planning and emergency ops depend upon more accurate and detailed information. The NHC is accurate enough for my needs in hurricane alley. Our lives and property are at stake. I say no to the likes of Accuweather.