Ethics Assignment

1.) When Steven Smith referred to the allegations against Mayor Jim West he made a differentiation between a legitimate news story and a non-legitimate one because of the privacy that even the mayor deserves in his own life. If he wasn't abusing children then their search would be nothing except a violation of the mayors right to choose how he wants to live his life. However since there was information pertaining to him and the abuse of young children a reason for further investigation was not needed. He needed to make this differentiation otherwise the whole investigation might have been seen as a way to discriminate against gay people. 

2.) He justified the use of a concealed identity through the idea that if the mayor was looking for young men online that there would finally be proof if he did go after the 17 year old fake online identity. If the mayor however did not go after younger men then he probably would not have justified its use. Morlin could not do it himself because it is against the rules he has as a reporter. The code of ethics prevented him from pretending to be someone else. 

3.) I believe that The Spokesman Review's decision to publish so many articles on Jim West was because of the fact that he offered positions in his office to young men he met online. Steven Smith continued to put forth these stories to most likely show the problem with this sort of hypocrisy taking place in a government facility. His possible connection with child abuse in the boy scouts was probably another reason for the articles and was most likely to help find out if these rumors were true. 

4.) In a way I don't see anyone besides mayor Jim West benefiting from the decision to expose him and his alleged improprieties. By releasing the story it released West from still living a hidden life that was in turn crushing him as well as the lives of younger men. The gay community took a blow from this as well due to the image that was given forth by his actions. What use was it to him to hide his private life from the public and have directly opposite political views? The outcome of exposing Jim West was probably worth it in the long run, yet it seemed to cause more harm than good as all it seemed to do was ruin a mans life as well as to make people think he was a really bad man even without direct evidence. The outcome of the whole ordeal seems to me to not have really changed much besides the fact that Spokane will now keep better tabs on their government officials. 

5.) It seems that The Spokesman Review is grabbing at nothing. Is someone following around these officials everywhere they go trying to find something wrong with their actions. The article on Jack Lynch seems like another witch hunt and another way to fill space in the paper. I believe their is definitely an ethical problem because of the lack of evidence they have as well as the way that they have been following his every action when they don't even have a direct reason to badger him.