Thomas Riccio earns much more money than I do, simply by talking about  O.J. Simpson, his former friend who he secretly taped and finished testifying about Monday.

I think one thing that has amazed me about the Simpson case is that so many media outlets that cover the case were allegedly willing to pay for information and interviews. When TMZ scored Riccio's tapes of the confrontation, the editor of the site was on "Larry King Live." He did not say how much TMZ paid for the tapes, but with a jaded attitude, he noted that any outlet would have paid for those tapes. I was surprised by his certainty on this point, because to the best of my knowledge, none of the organizations that I work for would ever pay for an interview (including the L.A. Times, Rolling Stone and Las Vegas Weekly).

I don't mean to sound artificially lofty. There are plenty of ethical challenges and complexities to covering Vegas that keep one dancing in the minefield. We all navigate this aspect of Vegas as best we can with the guidelines our employers offer and our sense of how to behave in situations not anticipated by those guidelines. As a recent example: I accepted media review tickets to the premiere of Donny & Marie at the Flamingo on Thursday night. It is work to be there, as I plan to write about the show for you Friday morning. But along with the invitation came an offer of a free dinner for two at either of two of the Flamingo's expensive restaurants. This was not meant by the Flamingo as a bribe. In the way resorts think, once you have media on property, you show off what you have in hopes that this will merit future attention. The Flamingo is not thinking a trip to the steakhouse will make a critic into a fan of Donny & Marie. But still, when the Flamingo followed up with a phone call to me last week to find out when I wanted my reservation, I declined the free dinner. I do not fault other writers who accepted the meal. On other occasions, particularly when getting a tour of a closed nightclub with the registers off-line, I accept a free soda. My point is that particularly in covering Vegas, your ethics are something you must guard with care, and you must not be casual about accepting anything that resorts offer. The resorts want to get the word out on shows and amenities, and journalism rules are not their concern or interest. They think with a hospitality model.

Anyway, back to the subject for paying for interviews. That has no gray to it. I simply won't do that, and (I don't pretend to stand alone) neither would any of my colleagues (at least that I am aware). If paying for interviews is practiced by the local Vegas press corps, then it is done so underhandedly; I have never been suspicious of anyone's access for interviews. Also, I have never been asked for cash for an interview or assistance getting an interview.

This is in part the way the press is used in Vegas; the people we interview are essentially bribed on the resort end to talk to the press. Vegas has many ways to compensate celebrities, from free rooms to hosting fees at nightclubs to gambling chips for playing. But in exchange for all of that, talking to the press is something the celebrities do for the resorts to sing for their supper. In the Simpson case, I am truly surprised by Riccio's allegations of just how many people were willing to pay him. He testified that TMZ paid him $150,000 for the tapes. The Review-Journal then summarized the following testimony:

"He (Riccio) also said "Entertainment Tonight" paid him $25,000, the Howard Stern radio show paid him $20,000 through a sponsor, and ABC paid him $15,000 under the guise of paying for a Simpson photo."

Of course, Riccio has proved a less than reliable witness. And how someone sees a payment matters. To give an example, a close friend of mine who does not give a lot of interviews about her work was profiled in a national magazine with a strong reputation for good journalism. She agreed to be interviewed for the story, because of the integrity of the magazine's reputation. The magazine also photographed her in Vegas. After the photograph ran, she was surprised to be contacted by the magazine, which asked for her Social Security number, and then she received a check for a substantial modeling fee. This had no influence on her decision to be interviewed for the story, especially because she did not expect to be paid for the photo. But $15,000 would be a lot for a photo of Simpson when there are so many of them available already.

(Photo O.J. Simpson  during his trial at the Clark County Regional Justice Center courtesy Getty Images)