By Jerry Ceppos

Let’s say the mayor, who is separated from his wife, hires a client of his girlfriend’s public-relations firm to head an important city commission. In fact, the girlfriend’s boss even approached the client on behalf of the mayor. Further, it’s unclear at best about how many people knew of the connection between the girlfriend and the client.

Is that a story because of the possible conflict of interest? Sure. I often use the “mayor  test”  when I try to determine whether  the media face ethical issues. No code of conduct can cover every situation, but the “mayor test”  can.

I used the test again when I examined the Los Angeles Times’ messy, and now very public, conflict over the hiring of a guest editor for its Sunday opinion section. Here’s how the Times reported on itself:

Los Angeles Times Publisher David D. Hiller’s decision Thursday to scrap a special opinion section to avoid the appearance of an ethical breach triggered the resignation of Editorial Page Editor Andres Martinez, who accused the paper’s editor and publisher of overreacting.

Hiller announced early in the day that he would not publish a special Current section — featuring Hollywood producer Brian Grazer as guest editor — because it might appear to some readers that Grazer had an unfair advantage when he was selected.

Grazer has been represented by the publicity firm 42 West and executive Kelly Mullens, who is Martinez’s girlfriend. Martinez and Mullens denied that their relationship influenced the decision to pick Grazer as the first in a planned series of prominent guest editors for the Current section.

In an interview…Martinez said that halting publication of the special section “was an overreaction. It was not necessary. I think the damage to the institution was significant.”

Wrong. Hiller made the right decision and made it quickly. I hope that he writes an opinion piece explaining to the public what went through his mind. It would be a shame to waste this teachable moment.

Martinez  could have avoided the mess by choosing someone else for this first guest editorship, an unusual idea for a newspaper and one that was controversial at the paper. (Magazines often use this technique. Actually, it’s not a bad idea, though I’m unclear  about exactly what the guest editor’s duties were.) In fairness, Martinez supposedly was turned down by a few other candidates—but that wasn’t reason enough to go to someone with ties to his girlfriend.

The poor judgment would have been very obvious if the conflict of interest were widely known (there’s controversy over just how known it was)—and if the Times had used the “mayor test.”