The entire sorry affair is rather reminiscent - to those of us of a particular vintage - of the moment during the General Election campaign of 1983 when the venerable Margaret Thatcher was the guest on a Friday evening edition of the old BBC-TV programme "Nationwide" and viewers were invited to put their questions to her as the Prime Minister of the day.
It happened that the last person to appear on screen and put a question was a lady named Diane Gould and she asked about the sinking by the Royal Navy of an Argentinean ship - the "General Belgrano" - during the Falklands War of 1982, which Mrs. Thatcher liked to claim as being in some way symbolic of her personality.
Mrs. Gould asked Mrs. Thatcher about suggestions which had been made ever since the attack on the General Belgrano that the ship had actually been sailing away from an area declared an 'exclusion zone' by the Royal Navy and the sinking had been gratuitous.
Mrs. Thatcher was visibly furious and became more enraged as Mrs. Gould proceeded calmly to emphasise the point she was making; the presenter - Sue Lawley - brought the programme to an end.
Margaret Thatcher was reported to have fumed at her staff and vowed not ever again to return to the BBC studios to participate in any other programme that had a similar format and she was true to her word.
What lessons ought we to draw from the equivalent of the 'Diane Gould moment' as experienced by Gordon Brown following his original meeting of Wednesday, 28th April 2010 with a lady by the name of Gillian Duffy?
It ought perhaps to be borne in mind that Gordon Brown is a former Television presenter and programme Producer and would have been well aware of the manner in which video film can be edited to distort and mis-represent a situation.
Assuming for a moment that his radio microphone had not helpfully caught the words he used in his car following the encounter of that morning, the evening News would probably have featured the item as a case of Gordon Brown being challenged about an issue by Mrs. Duffy and not having an answer to the question, which was precisely the point he made to his adviser in the car as they were leaving.
What do we learn from the recording and the actions of Gordon Brown in the aftermath of hearing what had been broadcast to the nation?
Gordon Brown loathes prejudice of any kind - it would appear that his experiences throughout his life have taught him to approach people with respect in the first instance, which tends to suggest that he is genuinely concerned about their needs and feelings and not simply adopting a facade for the camera.
Gordon Brown would have been acutely aware that the Prime Minister of a nation cannot appear to have been declamatory about an individual citizen and he moved quickly to apologise to Mrs. Duffy for any distress that was caused and to express that same sorrow in person that she had been rather demeaned in public.
Gordon Brown could only have formed his opinion of Gillian Duffy in the two-and-a-half minutes during which she asked questions or made comments about at least four different subjects.
The fact that Gordon Brown apologised for his personal opinion coming into the public domain does not mean that the comments Mrs. Duffy made ought to be regarded as becoming suddenly sacred - she did manage to link a supposed lack of provision of amenities in the local area to false claims made by people who did not have an entitlement and associated those remarks with her observation about the "flocking" to Britain of 'eastern Europeans'.
What was she suggesting? Where was the evidential basis for what she appeared to be trying to say?
It is bound to be true of David Cameron and Nick Clegg and all other political leaders in every corner of the globe that they make statements of a similar type about people they meet - they would not be human beings if that was not the case.
It is what everyone does - we are forthcoming in private about our true feelings not only regarding strangers but friends and even our immediate family, safe in the knowledge that there are not stray pieces of sound equipment in the vicinity.
The controversy that has been generated does alight upon a fundamental point - the right of any of us to a private conversation, including public figures holding high political office.
It did not have to be the case that Gordon Brown was in the car speaking to his political assistants about Gillian Duffy; what would we feel if he had been discussing the health of his children with his wife without realising that it was becoming a matter of public record?
We ought not to be too loud in our condemnation of Gordon Brown - provided that we believe he did anything wrong in giving an opinion, which is debatable if Gillian Duffy is to be lauded for the same reason - for an event that we mortify us if it occurred in our own lives.