Two articles in recent days highlight the ethical challenges of Silicon Valley tech bloggers.

Many bloggers and their organizations separate their editorial efforts from any economic pressures involving advertisers or those they cover.

But in some instances bloggers are accepting investments in their operations and writing about those benefactors without much identifying or avoiding the conflicts involved.

In some instances bloggers are soliciting investments to create their own venture funds and writing for presumably large audiences about the companies they feature --- likely positively, and almost assuredly not before they parlay their insider knowledge into greater wealth.

The articles in the Los Angeles Times and on The Daily Beast acknowledge that blogging isn't necessarily journalism and that many bloggers are now the 21st century equivalent of the public relations firm.  But both are clear that there are conflicts galore in this new trend.

Arthur S. Brisbane, the public editor of The New York Times, writes this week about the value of using the news organization's website to reinforce its value with readers.

Brisbane notes how the web has deconstructed the traditional way in which content was organized, and in that new dynamic is a relationship that needs a new arrangement. He sees the website's organization as an important ingredient in that redefinition.

Among other things Brisbane says the site should have a clear place for an exchange with readers. He believes the Times newsroom and readers need this portal.

He also says the site needs an updated list of Times journalists and their areas of coverage. He notes the existing listings are not current.

The site also needs a searchable archive of ethics policies, a form to launch complaints and seek corrections, and (without a great deal of selfishness in the way he puts it) a clearer path to read the public editor's columns.

He adds: "Would a reader portal on NYTimes.com offset the centrifugal effects of the digital revolution? Certainly not. But as the model for publishing news changes rapidly, it is important to find ways to ensure that the center holds—and to fortify the core values that ultimately define how readers view The Times. The reader portal would be a concrete step in that direction."

Earlier this week the British Broadcasting Corp. set aside about two minutes of airtime across its many channels and platforms to broadcast an apology for 15 instances in documentaries that had failed to meet its standards.

The BBC Trust examined the documentaries by a London-based production company and found that in some cases they had been financed partly by public relations clients, including multinational companies and governments. This followed an investigation by The Independent newspaper.

Eight pieces in particular were financed by the Malaysian government, including one positive about the country's palm oil industry. One on Egypt's uprising was financed in part by a company doing work for the Egyptian government.

The Trust, which oversees BBC's standards of editorial quality, said the documentaries themselves did not violate BBC's requirement for impartiality. But their financing in some cases violated policy and in others raised questions of conflicts of interest.

In his latest The Media Equation column, The New York Times' David Carr notes the problem of the "burped up" thought that is Twitter, particularly when it intersects with professional expectations.

Carr cites the recent suspension of CNN's Roland Martin following a Tweet during last week's Super Bowl. Carr writes a thoughtful and self-deprecating look at the challenge of using social media when his employer has high standards. The instant judgment isn't always congruent with the overall judgment.

He concludes that 140 characters makes it difficult to be journalistic, even if it is fun and even if is a requirement.

The first phase of the Leveson inquiry into journalism conduct is drawing to an end, and the influential British media publication Press Gazette has created a new "manifesto" for journalists in light of what it has heard.

Its Journalists Code, designed to assist the deliberations of the inquiry, would require a signed pledge from journalists to uphold several provisions, including:

- More respect for the privacy of celebrities, but continued scrutiny of any illegality, dishonesty or hypocrisy.

-Greater transparency among news organization to deal with press inquiries about them.

-A ban on mentions of advertisers in editorial content.

-Libel reform to protect journalism in the public interest.

-A stronger Press Complaints Commission that can stipulate how corrections and rulings should be published.

-An independent commission with a majority of its non-journalist members.

-An end to unpaid internships.

-An end to copy approval by publicists and others pre-publication.

With a U.S. election looming, Twitter has created a new hub to train journalists on best practices to use the microblogging service.

The @TwitterforNews account shares, in 140 characters or less, tips for journalists. But the hub, Twitter for Newsrooms, is a more thorough guide to researching, reporting, engaging, networking and maintaining security.

"We want to make our tools easier to use so you can focus on your job: finding sources, verifying facts, publishing stories, promoting your work and yourself—and doing all of it faster and faster all the time," the service says on the site.