David Blunkett's objection to an in-depth interview he gave "as a favour" to a student appearing in the London Evening Standard raises a few questions about the ethics of using quotes given in the belief that they will never be published, writes Claire Cozens.
The secretary of state for work and pensions, who resigned from government last year after an investigation found he helped secure a visa for his former lover's nanny, claims he did not grant his permission for the interview to be published.
The interview, in which Mr Blunkett discussed his complex personal life, his political ambitions and the problems of coping with his disability, has gained widespread coverage in the media since it was published yesterday.
He also said it was highly unlikely that Britons would vote in a blind prime minister, because they would see it as a possible risk, and claimed that not being able to see people's faces made him a fairer judge of character – but admitted having "got it wrong in a big way" on one occasion.
The Standard is insisting that Laura Topham, whose byline appeared above the piece in yesterday's paper, had Mr Blunkett's permission to use his comments in the paper.
It says she wrote the original piece for a journalism course but subsequently contacted Mr Blunkett through a mutual friend, and secured his permission for it to be published.
If true, this leaves Mr Blunkett with no grounds for complaint. But even if he did not subsequently give his permission for the journalist to use his comments it looks at best naive for him to to have been so candid if he did not wnat his remarks to see the light of day.
Claire Cozens is MediaGuardian.co.uk's press and publishing correspondent
