Media commentators are undecided about whether it is acceptable for the producers of two popular current affairs programmes on state television to double as the PR agents of the €200 million White Rocks sports project.
When the government announced that a foreign consortium would be developing the dilapidated White Rocks site into a sports and leisure village, it was also announced that the advertising arm of Where's Everybody would handle the project's public relations.
Where's Everybody is the company that, among others, produces two of TVM's most popular prime time programmes, Bondiplus and Xarabank.
But producers and company directors Lou Bondi and Peppi Azzopardi do not feel their involvement affects their credibility or creates a conflict of interest which they cannot overcome if they have to produce a programme on the project.
Mr Bondi pointed out that there was "no issue yet" meriting a programme but if one arose, he would have no problem raising it during his show.
"Would The Times run a story if one of its advertisers was in the news? Where's Everybody would act in the same manner," Mr Bondi said.
Public Broadcasting Services Acting CEO Natalino Fenech also played down the potential conflict and questioned whether every job had to have "strings attached".
He said there were many companies which regularly advertised on all media, including TVM, and his news station would have no problem doing stories if anything negative came to light about them.
"I am sure if Lou Bondi or Peppi Azzopardi would want to do a programme and think they may have a perceived or actual conflict of interest, they would declare it to us and then we would take it from there."
But media commentator Carmen Sammut was much harsher and said this case illustrated the "incestuous relationship" that often existed between journalism and PR. She added it was not only Where's Everybody that had turned into "publicists in journalists' skin".
She said the White Rocks debate involved the government and private investors, and at this stage it was not even clear whose interests the company would be protecting.
"Although they have publicly acknowledged they are behind the PR campaign, producing a fair and balanced programme on such an important issue may now be difficult. They will also be in a quandary even if they decide not to touch the controversy that is building up."
She said the company currently controlled prime time slots on PBS where such discussions should be taking place, so if Where's Everybody had forfeited the important role of being "autonomous and credible", the public was the biggest loser.
But blogger and lecturer Fr Joe Borg was not so quick to judge and said he was not prepared to take a conclusive public position until carrying out further research.
However, he pointed to other issues that could be raised in the debate, such as the acceptance of freebies in exchange for writing articles or paid trips abroad to cover specific events.
"Does it mean that if one accepts freebies, especially paid trips abroad, one will write only positive things? A lot will depend on how ethically minded the journalist is and whether this freebie is declared by the journalist in question."
He added that in today's scenario where the same company had fingers in many pies this could hinder editorial independence or strengthen it, because it could give the company greater financial stability and independence.