You might remember the question about whether Gwen Ifill, while working on a book that included a chapter about Barack Obama, should have moderated a vice presidential debate.

During an online chat on Thursday, Ifill faced another question about her book and her promotion of it as Obama took office (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/01/15/DI2009011502135.html)

The book is an examination of “a generation of rising political leaders” and reading it probably “will put your concerns to rest,” she told the questioner.

This item from the Christmas season is telling. You’ve probably seen the heart-tugging newspaper series that double as charity appeals. This one blew up in the face of the Cincinnati Enquirer ((http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/contents/comments/does_the_old_and_impoverished_child_sex_offender_deserve_a_gift_this_christ/). One subject, the paper found out after publication, is a convicted sex offender. I’d like to think that a campaign to help the needy is more complicated than the abrupt morality play of this correction.

Even if we’re carefully detached on the beat, what happens when the nation’s most celebrated politico comes to our newsroom? (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/inauguration-watch/2009/01/obama_visits_washington_post.html) Should we crowd around, crane our necks, snap pictures? Is that human or unprofessional? How about this: We’re journos, we’re curious, we investigate. But there’s no real “off duty” when it comes to staying an arm’s length removed. As a guide, consider what you’d do while covering a public meeting.

Miami Herald columnist and Knight professor Ed Wasserman tells the story of “a career columnist with career problems”:

Penelope Trunk delivered career advice on Yahoo Finance until two weeks ago, when Yahoo dropped her Brazen Careerist column. Trunk says Yahoo decided the column didn’t draw enough traffic to warrant the premium rates advertisers pay to be in its financial news package. So out she went.

It could be a telling example of online journalism’s new direction, he writes. If news organizations live by the click, they could be killing good journalism:

The problem with online Popularity Pay is it that it mistakes journalism for a consumer product, and conflates value with sales volume. Journalists don’t peddle goods, they offer a professional service, a relationship. The news audience renews that relationship to get information and insight on matters it trusts journalists to alert it to, even though the news may be disquieting or hard to grasp.

It’s a point to ponder, but the venerable Wasserman may have been scooped on this issue. When The New York Times’ most-e-mailed-articles list threatened to tear apart its newsroom, the first — and only — organization to report on it was The Onion.

Give CNN credit for acknowledging the new possible conflict involving its on-air health expert (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/06/gupta.surgeon.general/?iref=mpstoryview). But I have trouble with the reasoning. “Health and wellness matters” are fair game but not “health-care policy”? There’s no getting around the fact that the soon-to-be top educator in the Obama administration is part of the news team at “the most trusted name in news.” It would be wiser to avert the conflict entirely – take him off the air now, instead of later – rather than brush up against the ethical line for a while.