__________
I am going to suggest a different philosophy - which you might consider 'nuanced', but there's an important distinction here, for your 'propaganda' characterization suggests intentional misinformation, and I don't believe that's the case at all.
The NHC's role - and I certainly hope this is their attitude - is about public safety. As a result, they *should* be quick to warn and slow to declare an area to be safe.
That MUST be the case when uncertainty reigns.
Most forecasts of general weather are off by timing, miles, and scope of impact... but we don't care as much because we can roll with those changes routinely.
However, a hurricane kills people much more easily and thus those errors are scrutinized and magnified all the more. Forecasters can't really afford to be wrong, but the nature of the beast means that 'wrong' is still in play.
Ergo - an over-abundance of caution, for being wrong in this game means that many can be caught unawares.
Being wrong means more loss of life.
If I see a freight train bearing down on someone, I warn them.
I don't stand back and watch it happen worried that they'll call me an alarmist for doing so.