Praful Nargund

PERHAPS we should’ve known where political journalism was going when Boris Johnson refused to be interviewed by Andrew Neil at the last election – obviously scared that he would be ripped to shreds.

Johnson, of course, went on to win, so the empty chair in the TV studio made no difference to the result at all.

Unchallenged by any difficult questions, he went on to do what he wanted in Downing Street and we all saw where that ended up.

Maybe a more rigorous press – or at least an understanding that we need journalists asking difficult questions of politicians – would have led to a better outcome.

Now it’s not for us to compare our political reporter Isabel Loubser to Andrew Neil – even if both bring a similar dogged resilience to the job.

But she appears to be the reporter that Labour’s candidate in Islington North, Praful Nargund, dare not speak to.

Readers will perhaps be aware of the unnecessary saga which has unfolded in recent weeks: a million requests for an interview with Mr Nargund have been rejected, with the suggestion coming back that the Tribune is too prickly a beast to sit down with.

Instead, his team of macho advisers have demanded journalists “bid” for access in Islington North, with the chosen reporters then gratefully filing the required glossy profiles of their man.

Maybe it should be seen as a badge of honour if politicians do everything they can not to be interviewed by a particularly switched on journalist.

It is now considered an “exclusive” to speak to somebody seeking to be elected, rather than a duty to explain why they want to be an MP.

This cynical strategy of cherry-picking interviews has been concealed with a misguided idea drifting around Labour circles that Mr Nargund would not get a fair hearing in these pages, after our scrutiny of the selection process and reveal that Jeremy Corbyn would be standing as an independent – a major news story given he has represented this area for more than 40 years in parliament.

As it happens, local papers are in the main much fairer in their coverage in terms of space and tone than our national counterparts.

The party’s leader, Sir Keir Starmer, has not made decisions on which media outlet will be hostile and which will not, and has spoken to aggressive organisations like The Sun and GB News.

But down the chain, Labour’s organisers, flowing with adrenalin and perhaps some testosterone too, have dosed their paranoia that the Ming Vase might break just before the finish line by removing any risk factors.

Mr Nargund is not alone among Labour candidates across the country who have turned down invitations to a series of hustings.

As such, as a newspaper that has not even been allowed to take a photograph of him on the campaign trail let alone speak to him, we can neither estimate whether he will be a good choice or a bad choice to be our area’s MP.

That will be something that may have to be discovered after the votes are counted.

In the void, it can hardly be surprising that coverage has seemed one-sided or misinformation has sprouted online. A golden opportunity to counter both has been ignored.

If you are wondering whether Mr Nargund simply doesn’t think a local paper, still delivered in its thousands each week, has value, we must point to some blue riband chutzpah.

His campaign material includes clippings from the Tribune ­– while all the time refusing to be questioned by the same paper.

Mr Nargund is, according to one poll and the confidence of his supporters, closing in on a place in the Commons.

Whether it’s good for accountability or not, Johnson’s winning press strategy is in full flow.