Not all ethical decisions in journalism are black and white. When does it become acceptable to take steps some may seem as questionable for the greater good?

That’s a question that journalists are buzzing over regarding the Spokane (Wash.) Spokesman-Review’s expose on Mayor Jim West. West, a Republican, stands accused of molesting young boys years ago, trolling the Internet for gay lovers while serving as mayor, and “leading a secret gay life” while pursuing “anti-gay” legislation. But while the light of scrutiny is on West, who has taken a leave of absence, it also shines on the newspaper’s tactics.

In order to confirm West’s on-line identity on gay chat rooms (the paper had transcripts but could not confirm that the poster was indeed West), the newspaper hired a computer expert to pose as a curious 18-year-old gay man. West made contact and they engaged in several conversations — West promised the man an internship in Spokane. Read more:

Editor Steven Smith said the decision was necessary to confirm what the paper had learned, and that the decision was made after a great deal of deliberation.

While Smith said letters are coming in 15-to-1 in favor of the articles, journalists are divided on whether the Spokane newspaper crossed the line. Editors aplenty have condemned, essentially, an undercover “sting” operation. But others call Spokane’s actions and three-year investigation a triumph of good old-fashioned “public trust” journalism.

The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics does not forbid undercover work, but strongly discourages it:

Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story [sic]

I’m not yet sure where I stand on this issue. The newspaper made it crystal clear to its readers that it engaged in an act of subterfuge, and made its reporting transparent with transcripts and other links. Furthermore, the undercover man did not contact West; West made contact with him. Last but not least, the newspaper had its facts nailed down without the contact — the on-line stuff was icing on a cake of rock-solid investigative work.

But having said that, if the story was so rock solid, why did the Spokesman-Review need to engage in a sting operation to confirm transcripts that were “sexy” as we say in the news biz, but ultimately unnecessary? This is but one of several unanswered questions that taint an otherwise decent investigation piece.

I’m not the only one wondering this. Dave Zeeck, executive editor of the Tacoma News Tribune, asks the same thing in his column, “Solid Spokane story didn’t need subterfuge to spice it up:”

Without the expert’s ruse, they already had their 53-year-old mayor trolling for sex online and admitting to having consensual sex with an 18-year-old he met through a chat room. Gay or straight, that’s not the sort of behavior I want my mayor engaging in. I see no reason to concoct a second story.

In the interest of fairness, Smith responded to Zeeck’s column here through Romenesko Letters.

Here are the questions that are on my mind, and I also want to hear what you have to say. Now, I emphatically want to state that I don’t think that this undercover stuff automatically discredits the work that the newspaper did — the case against West is solid and damning, despite the expiration of the statute of limitations. But here is what has been bothering me:

1) Despite the newspaper’s best efforts, West’s offering the undercover writer an internship has become part of the dialogue, and the newspaper had not proven that West had a prior history of doing so. Does this constitute entrapment on the part of the paper?

2) One of the stories in the package quotes people blasting West for not supporting the “gay agenda.” Some examples — West backed legislation banning gays from becoming teachers, and opposed legislation that would make hate crimes against gays a special offense.

So my question — given the media’s obsession with diversity over good journalism, would these stories have ever seen the light of day had West’s public life matched the Spokesman-Review’s idea of how a homosexual or bisexual should vote and think?

So, let’s open the floor to what you think. Once again, I implore you to keep on the topic of the newspaper’s ethics. If you want to debate the morality/religious implications of homosexuality, do so elsewhere — this is not the forum for such a topic, and comments to that effect will be deleted.

As for what other area newspapers are saying, visit The Oregonian, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Seattle Times.