The general election

It was in the public interest

We had a right to know what
the prime minister said in his car

Alan Fisher

This was meant to be the election where social media would dictate the winner, where Facebook and Twitter would drive the agenda and the politicians would have to embrace the realities of the electronic hustings of the 21st century. The template was provided by Barack Obama, who drove so much of his fundraising through the internet, picking up millions of young people who never voted and were captivated by the message of change, the 'audacity of hope'.
     Yet, as Kenneth Roy rightly points out, the defining moments of the 2010 UK election have been provided by 'old media'. The debates have changed the face of the campaign. Nick Clegg's emergence into the public consciousness came with being given the same time, the same platform as the two other party leaders. No longer restricted to just one appearance at prime minister's questions, no longer abused and derided by his fellow 'honourable members' when he tried to speak, he seized the moment and propelled his party into a possible second place finish, and in turn held out the prospect of changing the face of British politics for ever.
     And then there was the moment which has become known as 'Bigotgate'.  Kenneth makes his usual eloquent argument against the decision not just to record a private conversation but to transmit it. He questions if there is a legitimate public interest defence for doing so. There is.
     I am no apologist for Sky or Rupert Murdoch. He employs enough people to fight his battles for him. Yet, if I had been in charge of a newsroom which obtained the recording, I would have been happy to broadcast it.
     Firstly, let us make clear, Gordon Brown knew he was wearing a microphone. It's now common practice for the leaders to be wired up at the start of their campaign stops just in case they encounter someone like Mrs Duffy. Gordon Brown's aides asked for the personal microphone as he found the large booms to be distracting. Secondly, the British broadcasters have entered into an agreement which means they share facilities over the course of the election, with different companies assigned to different campaigns and then the material made available to all. The 'pool' operation in Rochdale was Sky.
    
Now on to the crux of Kenneth's complaint: this was not in the public interest.
     We have, in an uncertain financial climate, the leaders of the three main parties campaigning on issues of trust. That they are the best equipped to lead the country out of the current malaise and into a bright new future. Character is also a central issue.
     Gordon Brown's outburst revealed him to be guilty of gross hypocrisy.  After walking away from Mrs Duffy telling her she had a nice family, the car door was barely closed when he began his ill-tempered rant. He didn't raise the issue with Mrs Duffy, or question her thoughts and beliefs.  Instead he played to the cameras with his public face and raged at her in private.
     The prime minister then went on to blame staff for directing 'that woman' in his direction and had a blast at the media for crowding round him. Everyone was to blame but him. Earlier this year, his office issued strong denials that Mr Brown was rude to staff or prone to explosions of anger. The allegations surfaced in a book. Its author, Andrew Rawnsley, must have allowed himself a small smile.
     And then there was the contempt that Gordon Brown displayed towards Mrs Duffy, as if somehow during a campaign where we were told he was going to meet real people, she had no right to raise an issue which the political classes have failed to grasp as one of deep public concern. If he truly felt she was a bigot why didn't he confront her, rather than trying to charm and smarm like every other politician.
     You cannot boast of having a moral compass then act in such a manner because you think it might lose you votes.
     These are all important issues.
     Kenneth is right when he says this would not have been broadcast if it had been Tony Blair in 1997 or Margaret Thatcher in 1983. I agree. It probably wouldn't. The UK media are cowardly to rising power, and Gordon Brown is being seen as 'fair game'.
     This was a private conversation – but there is a clear public interest in knowing what those who ask for our vote and our support think about us.  It was right the public knew what was said. And this has set a standard for the future. Other politicians will now be wary of microphones knowing that anything they say while wired up is fair game.
     Finally, while the media can influence the agenda in modern elections, if Kenneth can see through the spin and the alleged bias, what makes him think others cannot?
     It's not the telly 'wot won it' – it is still the people who decide. And they soon will.

Alan Fisher is an Al Jazeera correspondent

For more comments on this and related issues see The Cafe
[click here]