Okay, what about ghost-writing? (NCEW vs. Planted Opinion).

Editorial page editors call the op-ed page a garden of ideas, and they cultivate it lovingly. Still, it needs weeding as much as any plot of petunias.

So when I returned to NCEW after a nine-year hiatus, I was delighted to discover the organization's lively listserv feature, buzzing with "turf alerts." Editors warning other editors about special interest groups that dupe compliant readers into slipping planted letters past our most determined screening efforts.

Sure, the listserv is great for exchanging other information, too, from the configuration of editorial boards to the handling of a controversial "Doonesbury" strip. But keeping our letters section pure and trustworthy, that's valuable.

The turf-alert messages have been flying about so vigorously that you almost have to duck when you open your e-mailbox. We've learned about websites that offer sample letters to the editor on every subject from energy policy to human rights in East Timor. We've learned to suspect any letter addressed "Headquarters." We've confirmed that being vigilant and sharing tips are good ways to avoid being flooded with embarrassing gotcha messages from astute readers who love to point out that we were victimized.

It doesn't matter that deceitful contributors genuinely share the views expressed in the message, nor that the real author has offered it willingly for use by others. It's simply that it's dishonest. We shut it down when we catch it, blush and run a correction when we don't.

As Tim Gleason, dean of the School of Communication and Journalism at the University of Oregon, puts it, "Signing your name doesn't mean 'I agree with this.'"

Of course not. It means "I wrote this." The operative element in "byline" is "by."

So when phony intruders take root in our garden we grab a hoe and chop them down. Unless ...

Unless the organism that contaminates the purity of our garden is the op-ed piece that comes to us--via a public information officer or PR agency, naturally--from a VIP with a free pass that allows him to circumvent the institutional safeguards others must honor: governors, senators, CEOs, and executive directors of trade groups, professional organizations, and non-profits.

They don't write their own stuff. They provide a framework of ideas, perhaps, maybe even a rough draft, but the writing is a job for hirelings. The governor looks the final product over, tweaks a point or two, and returns it to the PIO who ships it off to the press--under the boss's byline. What does "by" mean here?

These situations don't sneak up on us. The PR intermediary is as clear a tip-off as "Headquarters."

But is it plagiarism? Probably not. CEOs don't steal the stuff they send us, they buy it. They contribute more to the final product than, say, the reader who copies and pastes a letter to the editor gleaned from bogusletter.com. Or the college student who pays a fraternity brother to write his term paper on 17th-century European history. But is the principle all that different?

One key, says Gleason, is whether the person who gets the byline was fully involved in crafting the message. The fact that staffers give structure and polish to a piece probably doesn't disqualify a CEO from putting her byline over the final product.

The Oregon dean concedes that the Internet has made the manipulation and reconfiguration of other people's thinking and writing commonplace--in term papers and in letters to the editor.

"We've become so accustomed to people mouthing words they haven't written we don't ever think about it any more," he said. Remember basketball star Charles Barkley, who claimed he was misquoted in his autobiography? But Gleason thinks the idea of ghostwriters and speechwriters for notable public figures is an accepted part of American political life. He doesn't consider it deceptive.

"If we took that position, then there would be no editors," he said. There's a fine line, agrees Mindy Cameron, retired editorial page editor of the Seattle Times. "It's closer to the editing process we use in the newspaper."

"What's the reader's expectation when he or she reads the column on your op-ed page?" asks Cameron. "If you talk to 30 CEOs, politicians, or others who speak to the public on a regular basis, you probably would find 30 different levels of involvement in the writing."

Cameron said the ghostwriting issue hasn't been a problem for her but she thinks it raises a legitimate question. "It's a lot trickier than it may seem at the outset," she said. It's practically impossible to know, for example, how much independent writing a political or organizational leader does in an op-ed that's submitted on his letterhead. What's the difference between that and a reader who submits a letter to the editor after having his wife go through and clean it up?

Does the quality of writing in an op-ed piece give readers--as voters--a deceptive impression of a political leader's/candidate's intelligence? And don't we reserve the right to edit op-ed submissions ourselves?

Does it undermine newspaper credibility to publish columns purporting to be "by" a well-known figure when we editors know that's untrue? Does it bolster a newspaper's credibility when readers can go there to read the thoughts that are at least endorsed by policy makers?

It's not readers' job to discern the subtleties, says Cameron. "In the pursuit of good ideas, we also wanted the best writers to present those ideas. People whose names are recognizable:'

Good op-ed pages don't rule out contributions from everyday readers, but they shouldn't exclude the prominent either.

Which brings me back to this question: If it's okay for big shots to send us material written for them by someone on hire, why is it wrong for Jane Citizen to do the same with commentary provided by a special interest group she believes in?

Personally, I prefer to reverse the question: If we won't let Jane get away with it, why should the governor?

Answers please. Meanwhile, hand me the hoe.

Doug Floyd is editorial page editor of the Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Washington. E-mail [e-mail]