Ethics

1. When referring to the allegation that Mayor Jim West was pursuing underage boys online, why do you think editor Steven Smith differentiated between a legitimate newsstory and one that is not legitimate when he said, "If he's [Mayor Jim West] engaged in this activity … we need to know that. If he's not -- there's no story" ?

The fact that the allegations were against someone in the public eye made the story legitimate. Mayor Jim West was someone who was trusted and his involvement in a scandal, although upsetting, makes the news. The mayor was engaging in illegal actions as well and publicly abuse his office of mayor. In order to publish the story, Morlin had to be absolutely sure that the mayor was "Cobra82" and then he could start publishing the accusations made by various sources.

2. How did reporter Bill Morlin justify the use of a concealed identity on Gay.com as part of The Spokesman-Review's and the FBI's "sting operation"? Why didn't Morlin himself create the assumed identity to engage Mayor West online?

Morlin's code of ethics prohibited him from concealing his identity and that is why they hired a consultant. Hiring consultants was not against the Spokesman's code.

3. Why do you think The Spokesman-Review ultimately published so many articles on Mayor West's alleged improprieties?

The story's detailed were interwoven with other stories, such as the history of child molestation in Spokane. Details kept coming forward and as the online relationship progressed they got more information and the mayor made decisions that signaled foul play to the reporters (like offering the false identity an internship). There were many angles of the story, West's molestation of boys in the 1970s, the online chat site, and the fact that the mayor was gay. The FBI investigated and that provided more to publish in the newspaper. West's response to the articles prompted more articles to be published as well. He believed he was a victim in this situation and the newspaper exploited that.

4. In the final analysis, who benefited from The Spokesman-Review's decision to expose Mayor West and his alleged improprieties? Who was hurt? Do you think the outcome was worth it? Explain your reasoning.

The Spokesman-Review benefited because they were the outlet with a story that would effect the city of Spokane. Mayor West was hurt the most by the story because he was publicly embarrassed in front of the city where he was a known public figure. His personal life became publicity. His secret was revealed and his illegal acts were exposed. West's life, politically and socially, was ruined because of the reports. The stress from the reports may have even contributed to the return of his cancer. It was necessary for the public to know what was going on in their government.

5. The Spokesman-Review has been criticized as conducting a "witch hunt" in its reporting on the private lives of some city officials. Below is a link to another recent article on Spokane Deputy Mayor Jack Lynch. Do you think that there are any ethical problems in the reporting in this story? Why or why not?

There is a lot of assumption in the reporting of this story. Reporters seem to be jumping to conclusions about why Lynch's car was at the park and also why he is on leave. I think these reports show a lack of news to report on, therefore reporters have to make their own news. From an ethical standpoint, it seems the newspapers are in the wrong by stirring uthings up that could possibly not be a big deal. However, it is the duty of reporters to inform the public about things that effect them and the reputation of the park as a drug center is critical to address. It is hard to draw the line on how far to go when investigating stories like this or of Mayor Jim West.