I've also declined offers of money to write specific pieces, even though I agreed with the sentiment. I just didn't feel comfortable with it. I'm disappointed to hear about Doug Bandow.

But what would be the problem with this: someone with an axe to grind approaches me to write a piece on a topic for compensation. I say that I don't do that kind of quid pro quo, even though I agree with the subject. But I do have a tip jar, and can point it out to them. If I write the piece that I want to write (perhaps partially based on material provided to me by them), and they like it sufficiently to make a donation of an amount of their choosing, is there anything wrong with that? The only way I've been influenced is by the idea of writing the piece in the first place.

Where is the line crossed? Only when there's an explicit quid pro quo, in which one is being a stenographer in exchange for an agreed-upon amount?

You know, this sounds an awful lot like the situation our Congressmen find themselves in. For instance, suppose a pro-military senator votes for a defense line-item and receives a campaign contribution from the contractor. Was it a bribe? There was no quid-pro-quo, and he likely would have voted for the defense line-item anyway since he was pro-military. But you just don't know, do you?

The situations are parallel.

What I want to know is, as a fully paid up member of the VRWC, where’s my cheque?

I guess that’s the problem with being known to have no ethical rules, no one can be bothered to bribe me.

Sigh.

What's the journalist's obligation other than to disclose if he is a paid hack?

As a reader, I'm ok with the payment after the support. It is meerly patronage and even good samaritans need to make a living. However, I do find fault with the concept of being approached, turning down the offer of money, but accepting the researched data sources. That research is both bias and worth its own value. So I see how that could taint your opinion and weaken your position. If you want to be free of any possible connection, then be absolutely free.

The easy to find news sources are biased too. It's a matter of cutting through the bias in your sources, then carefully choosing the bias you want in your reporting.