I just checked tomorrow’s weather forecast for London. And it says there may be the odd “heavy shower”, which must mean rain, rather than Richard Littlejohn. Now that may not come to pass – the forecast for Milan both yesterday and today has been for showers, and all that turned up was a brief sprinkle yesterday evening – but whatever happens, some mileage can be gained from dishing out blame.
If there is no rain, then every BBC and Met Office hating paper (for which read the Sun, Daily Star, Daily Mail, Daily Express and Maily Telegraph, for starters) will have a field day. Lack of precipitation will be held to confirm all the scare stories and slanted opinion pieces about the integrity of both organisations, plus climate change generally. A dry wedding will be cited by James Delingpole as the summation of his life’s work.
But if the rain does turn up, this presents a more difficult one for the press to call. Some may use it to play a long game: if the marriage ever hits a rocky patch, the weather event can be quoted as a bad omen. This, however, means that hacks must forego any immediate gain, and that is one big ask.
An easier fallback is to kick the Beeb once more: the forecast may be held to have jinxed the happy couple’s special day, and can be condemned as unpatriotic, a show of elite liberal bias, and a total lack of respect by whoever is on BBC coverage duty (especially Huw Edwards). The hacks will tell how we could have far more reliable weather without having to shell out for the licence fee.
It seems impossible, but an opportunity to work Muslims into the story will be dredged up somehow: the Mail will have Melanie Phillips on standby to explain how weather has become radicalised, but only in London and definitely not in Paris. Littlejohn, meanwhile, will try his best (so not very hard, then) to turn out one of his “spoof comedy sketches” in celebration, but nobody will be amused.While editors are deciding how to call any rainfall, the ever prurient Mail Online will be watching for any “wardrobe malfunctions” caused by the damp: nothing will be too explicit, because even if it shouldn’t be published, it will be, so that the why-oh-why brigade can then sound off about how it shouldn’t be. Similar guff will be available on the Express website, but not until the following day.