1) Steven Smith said there is no story if he is not trying to engage in sexual activity with underage men because then there is no illegal activity for being gay. He said the mayor may be a dirty old man, but still would not be committing a crime if he is simply gay and not having sex with minors.

2) He justified the sting operation by saying they needed to search for the truth. He didn't create the fake username on the gay chat room because he said it is against the rules and code of ethics of the Spokesman Review for him to use a fake identity.

3) I think they published so many because more and more information kept unraveling, and it was a very big story about an anti-gay mayor who may be gay, so people would keep reading it and buying newspapers. Also he said the papers were wrong at first, so they had to continue investigating the story.

4) If anyone benefitted, it would be the newspaper, and also victims of past sexual assaults because it may have brought them closure. However, we don't know for sure that he was a child molestor so it is hard to say if he really hurt anyone.

As for who was hurt, clearly the Mayor Jim West was hurt since his reputation was destroyed and his career was ended very rapidly. Also he had hidden his gay sexuality and had been anti-gay throughout his career, which made him appear to be a hypocrite.

I don't believe it was entirely worth it, although it was a huge story for the city of Spokane. There was never really proof that he was a child molestor, and all he did was be a gay person, but hide it. He felt he needed to hide it to advance high in his career, and it all came to an end after the truth came out. Maybe if it were shown that he had been a child molestor and hurt underaged peoples lives it would have been more worth it. If it were a janitor who happened to be gay, and people found out he was gay, but was not committing illegal activities, nobody would probably think twice about the situation.

5) I think there could possibly be some ethics issues in this article, because there is no proof of any illegal activities going on, just speculation and unusual events like his private vehicle being spotted in a bad neighborhood. I think the Spokesman-review should have continued investigating, and if they had found anything factual, it would have made for a much more legitimate story to be published at a later time. There could possibly be legitimate explanations for all these events, but as a political figure he will be under constant scrutiny which is unfair.