Blog

The beeb says in its report that he gave the interview on the understanding that it was for background and would not be broadcast. It seems that now he's a murder suspect their undertaking is null and void. I'm not comfortable with this.

There are a few reasons for my unease. First, remember he's a suspect and has yet to stand trial. So by law he's assumed innocent until proven guilty. This means the BBC is trashing a promise to an innocent man for the sake of a story. The world now knows he pays for prostitutes.

Also, even if he's guilty - and please don't tell me his trial can't be prejudiced by the above disclosure - when did it become OK to break a promise of confidentiality just because someone's a criminal? I can see the logic of handing the interview to the police. Lives are being lost here so of course anything material should be disclosed. But publishing or broadcasting has nothing to do with preventing further killing. Instead it has everything to do with chasing a story no matter whose word is broken in the process.

But who's going to give the BBC a backround interview again? I don't think I'd trust them. And as always it's the viewer, whose stories won't be as well-informed as previously because of people holding back, who'll suffer.