"In contrast to the contemporary media perception the government aid provided to Ethiopia was pretty much existing money that was reconfigured and, despite appearances, there was no ‘new money’. The UK Government rejected any longer term ongoing engagement and was just concerned with short-term emergency relief, appearing to be generous in reaction to disturbing media images. Furthermore Ministers were concerned that the relief that was provided (airdrops of food by RAF planes) should garner the maximum possible domestic political benefit and reap the best political dividend vis-à-vis Cold War adversaries. It is apparent from this analysis that the ability of the media coverage to produce change in official policy and official assistance was less apparent than might first have appeared. Ultimately the impact of the coverage was far more significant upon driving public opinion and (with the advent of Band Aid) in the way it changed the nature of charitable giving and private philanthropy. So that in terms of policy effects the media on this occasion appears to have a greater effect upon the policies and institutions of the voluntary sector and NGOs. If the 1980s is considered the ‘decade of the NGO’, then the response to the media coverage of Ethiopia played a key part in this expansion. Thus, we can see that in response to the media coverage of the Ethiopian famine the ability of news coverage to push official policy was far less substantial than may have appeared at the time. When in successive academic debates the Ethiopian famine is considered historically as a case of a ‘strong CNN effect’ that is not strictly speaking true. Public policy did not shift as a result of powerful media coverage of suffering. Official humanitarian assistance was severely limited and there was no change of heart about development aid." (Conclusions)