From the Telegraph:

Whatever your political inclinations, there is an inescapable human tragedy here: an intelligent, if wrong-headed, man who seems to have no idea what is so unattractive about his behaviour, or any inclination to make the concessions which would put it right.

And that is, I admit, quite fascinating. But other politicians have been emotionally tone deaf in this way - Edward Heath comes immediately to mind - without their inadequacy in this area becoming the stuff of public obsession.

It may have been Mr Brown's misfortune to have his particular idiosyncracies exposed in a period when voyeurism and the morbid exposure of personalities to unconscionable strain has become the currency of entertainment.

He has inadvertently facilitated the process by which politics becomes a species of reality television. In the Westminster village, we are all waiting for the next installment.

Will Mr Brown crack at the next PMQs and have to be led out of the chamber? Will we actually get to see him reduced to incoherent rage during his next television interview? Whose kick-and-tell memoirs will be next to reveal the details of his sulks and private outbursts?

On the flip side, this article suggests Gordon Brown would be a more successful PM 20 or 30 years ago.  If that's the case is it fair for the media to home in on his personality flaws...?  If only our media would home in on Helen Clark's arrogance, nasty put downs and miraculous ability to call others hypocrites and be guilty of doing the exact same thing but to a much greater degree. 

But then I think of how Don Brash was mascaraed for his seemingly bumbling and quaint style. 

So I can see the argument from both sides of the coin.  However, personality flaws are very much a matter of perspective, so to answer my question - no it isn't fair.