The Times’s article at the top of page 9 in its print issue on Friday about the by-election in Oldham West & Royton was headlined “Labour is counting the cost in Oldham.”

The opening sentence stated: “Labour was on course to avoid defeat in a crucial by-election last night amid concerns that rejection from working class voters would cut its big majority.”

Although it said that “senior party sources predicted that Labour would retain the constituency... despite negative views about Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership”, it continued:

“Activists noted that many voters were expressing negative views about him. ‘They were saying he was weak, unpatriotic, didn’t care about veterans,’ one MP said. ‘A man who has only ever voted Labour told me he will spoil his ballot.’ Another Labour MP said: ‘One bloke was complaining about Labour under Corbyn, but praised Hilary Benn. He said if [Mr Benn] was leader, he would vote for us.’”

Later it said that while the Labour candidate, Jim McMahon, was “widely expected” to win “his majority was expected to be substantially reduced.”

Substantially reduced, eh? On course to “avoid defeat”? The predictive ability of political reporter Callum Jones, not to mention his negative spin, was less than sparkling.

After the count, he was forced to report some of the facts. His new piece, published online, was headlined “Labour holds on to Oldham with ease.”

His intro said that “Labour comfortably retained the seat... despite concerns that working-class voters were turning their back on the party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”

He did not report all the figures, merely stating that McMahon secured a 10,835 majority. In fact, it represented an increase in Labour’s proportion of the vote, as the Guardian’s report made very clear.

But Jones did include a reaction by Corbyn in which he said: “To increase our share of the vote since the general election is a vote of confidence in our party.” Impossible to spin a direct quote, of course.

And look who else predicted “a dark night at the polls”. None other than the Labour-supporting Daily Mirror. It’s page 2 lead on Friday said Labour “was on course for a dismal result in the first election test of Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership.”

With friends like this, does Labour need enemies?

Then again, this video report by the Guardian’s John Harris was anything but positive about Labour’s chances. Why are election outcomes - remember the general election forecasts in May? - so hard for journalists to call nowadays?