Monday 11 October 2010

The ethics of "off the record"

Some of my more gentle colleagues raised an eyebrow when they saw David Cameron's remarks about "Amazon-gate" broadcast, when he was quizzed about the Devonwall issue on ITV Westcountry last week. One Cornwall councillor told me that in his opinion it had been wrong to broadcast remarks which the Prime Minister thought were private.

This is not the first time something like this has happened. Gordon Brown never intended his "bigot-gate" remarks to be heard during the general election campaign. John Major, when he was Prime Minister, did not intend his description of cabinet colleagues as "bastards" to be heard by anyone other than the former ITN political editor Michael Brunson - he was also unaware that his microphone was "active" and being recorded in another room.

David Cameron's gaffe, at the Conservative Party conference, came about because he apparently did not realise the camera was recording. Well, he should have known. Regional television crews take it in turns to get their own political correspondents into the "hot seat" opposite the Prime Minister. About three minutes each is the usual deal and the whole thing takes about half an hour of the Prime Minister's time.

The cameras are in position the whole time. They record the whole time. David Cameron has done this every year since becoming leader of his party and can have no excuse for thinking the cameras were switched off.

This leads me to the wider point - that it is the journalist, and not the politician, who decides what is and what is not "off the record." There is a very simple rule - everything is on the record, unless specifically agreed in advance. Were it to be otherwise there would be no such thing as journalism - there would be only dictation.



No comments:

Post a Comment