Imagine this scenario: Rumors begin to circulate about the impending resignation of a well-known community figure. Indeed, the person soon resigns his post, and immediately news surfaces that about 10 years ago he had a sexual encounters with a with a woman who was a teenager at the time.

Now, consider that the individual is a popular newspaper columnist in a major U.S. city. Does that change things in any way?

The scenario was real life for Chicago Tribune columnist Bob Greene, who, according to the Tribune itself, resigned in an ethical controversy involving his sexual encounter more than a decade ago with a girl in her late teens.” Greene, in his 50s, married with two children, had written for the newspaper for 24 years. Neither he nor the woman involved were available for comment to news reporters. Tribune Editor Ann Marie Lipinski said that she was not free to disclose additional details of the newspaper’s internal investigation,” according to the Tribune.

Based on the reactions offered by the newspaper itself, its readers, staff and their colleagues, the issue is far from clear cut. Central to the issue is whether this is a case of a newspaper holding itself up for the same critical, ethical examination that it would had the person involved been a public or elected official.

In a Tribune article, writer’s Jim Kirk and Monica Davey report that at least 60 percent of the phone calls and emails received in the Tribune newsroom “expressed support for Greene,” and the incident quickly dominated the local radio talk shows.

A Tribune editorial attempted to pacify readers’ interest in the story while explaining why it could divulge no further information. “In this case the journalistic urge to fully disclose the facts collides with two other imperatives: the privacy of the individuals involved, and this newspaper’s guidelines on when it is appropriate to discuss sexual misconduct related to young people…A newspaper cannot maintain the trust of its readers on issues like those if it does not judge itself just as rigorously.”

The Publicity Club of Chicago, which happened to have a scheduled meeting shortly after the incident was made public, noted the reactions among some of its members:

“It’s about ethics and whether someone’s private life deserves to be kept private. It also begs the question: What is the obligation of an employer to monitor the private lives of employees?” said one member. “The Tribune should be recognized for being forthcoming. Full disclosure is always the best path to follow.”

According to another member, “Ann Marie Lipinski deserves a lot of credit for taking a straight ethical approach. While no one disagrees that Bob’s actions merited some type of punishment, many of us thought that censure would be punishment enough since the event happened so long ago.”