We report the news. We never intended to become the news, and we certainly never expected our story to be covered by four major media outlets in a single day.

Where to begin this saga? In January, we began brainstorming new story ideas for the next issue of Montrose High School's Meteor Chronicle, a student publication produced by 35 students in two journalism classes. The journalism students had prepared several story idea sheets. Then the sheets were distributed to the section editors. They sorted the sheets and decided which ideas were legitimate for their respective sections. As a former news/features co-editor, I know the importance of this first step in the writing process.

The suggested stories were not the norm. Student Council had just started a Debate Club; an eighth-grade boy had just returned from Ghana with his father, a Ghanaian king; and two English teachers had just written their first novels.

"Yes, these will make great stories for the news/feature section of the newspaper," I remember telling the staff, but I was somewhat surprised that my story idea had not been mentioned.

As co-editor in chief, I led the next step in the process -- a class discussion of story possibilities. I waited. My idea still did not come up.

"Life As We Know It" is a yearlong series devoted to informing teens and the community about some of the issues teens face. It isn't the typical feature on Student Council or Key Club. In the past, we've written about the morning-after pill, teen marriage, divorce and even masochism -- basically, real issues that we teens confront. My idea, "friends with benefits" -- having sex or "fooling around" with friends without being in a committed relationship -- is a decision many teens face regularly.

The editors hesitated after my question. After a few seconds, I said, "What about my 'friends with benefits' idea?" Again, they hesitated. After class, I talked with the editors and sensed their uneasiness immediately.

Sex is a delicate topic, they said. What if the story weren't handled the right way? Why would sources want to speak about the topic? How was the topic going to be presented? What if it fell through?

The weekend passed, and Monday brought no new ideas. So I attempted to address the staff's concerns over a "friends" story, and we looked ahead to the next step in the planning process -- assigning stories.

The next day, co-editor Courtney Haggerty and I decided that we wanted to co-write the "friends with benefits" article. Perhaps the section editors' concerns would be alleviated if more experienced journalists, not first-year students, wrote this difficult piece.

Fear and inexperience weren't an issue for us -- and sources did want to speak about the topic as long as their names weren't divulged. The two girls and one boy who had participated in the behavior said their parents didn't know. We agreed to respect their privacy.

Some people wonder how we found our sources. I approached the students I had heard talking openly about "friends." If they had talked openly in public, I hoped they would feel comfortable talking to a reporter (which usually isn't the case).

I interviewed one sophomore girl, and Courtney and I interviewed a senior girl. Credibility of the sources was a concern, but we knew these girls to be forthright and honest in academic settings, and we found their stories plausible in this instance.

At the beginning of the interview process, our story definitely lacked balance. Courtney and I discussed our situation. We needed more sources, but who? Then it hit us -- there are many kids in school who do not participate in "friends with benefits." Their stories needed to be told also.

After interviewing approximately 10 students, it was time to write our story. The hardest part was the lead, the first few sentences at the beginning of the article. We needed a way to hook readers, to make them want to read the entire story.

As I sat at the keyboard, I recalled a story 15-year-old "Sarah" had told me. I had asked her to describe what had pushed her to be a "friend." She described generalities -- a warm, enclosed room where she first met a really attractive boy.

This wasn't enough. I thought about the reader's perspective. If he were reading a book, he'd want more details -- what did the boy look like? What were her first thoughts as she met him? I wanted the reader to not just envision the scenario, but to see it as then-13-year-old Sarah had seen it.

Then I began telling Sarah's story. I wanted the reader to see life as Sarah knew it. She participated in "friends with benefits," she said, because sex had given her confidence in her body and in other areas of her life, including academics. She wanted to find that right person; in the meantime, she was discovering herself.

Then I added senior "Lily's" story to the article. Her reasons for being a "friend" were slightly different than Sarah's. Distance and age separated her and her boyfriend. It was too hard to maintain a committed relationship, she said, because of their infrequent visits. "Friends" allowed them to be close with no strings attached. She didn't "fool around" with anyone else because of her genuine fear of contracting an STD, she said.

At this point, I thought it would be appropriate to add a professional's perspective to the story. Wendy D. Manning of Bowling Green University is associate professor of sociology and author of "Adolescents' Involvement in Non-Romantic Sexual Activity." It would be helpful, I thought, if the reader understood why and with whom teens are hooking up. In addition, "friends" aren't limited only to Montrose. It is a national trend discussed on talk shows like "Dr. Phil" and in newspapers such as the Seattle Times.

Then it was time to transition. I couldn't fit in every quote from the kids I had met who are against the practice. I quoted a couple and another boy. However, after the first draft, Courtney and I still felt uneasy about our article. We had four sources in favor of the behavior and three against.

In addition, we didn't have any quotes from boys who had experimented with "friends." After talking to several people, one boy agreed to be interviewed. He had participated in "friends with benefits" behavior but regretted his decision because it made him feel "awkward." Now, we had four sources for and four against--completely balanced.

After we added the last boy's quotes, we weren't done. I interviewed Sarah again and added several more quotes to the article. At that point, only minor revisions remained.

Hours of labor, thinking and rethinking, analyzing and interviewing were going to pay off -- or so we hoped. We thought this article would do what every other "Life As We Know It" had done -- shed light on a significant teen issue. We were oh-so-wrong.

When the newspaper came out Feb. 7, several students asked who our sources were. I refused to tell and thought that was the end of any discussion. Then at the school board meeting the next Monday, a parent complained about the article, saying its contents were inappropriate for a high school newspaper. That was only the beginning.

Other parents voiced concerns at a meeting with the administration several days later. A few days after that, the board held a curriculum meeting.

Parents voiced concerns about their young children reading the article. Some taxpayers said they didn't want "that kind of stuff" sent to their houses. Others felt we, as the writers, had "glorified" or "condoned" sexual behavior among unmarried teens. The list of criticisms went on and on.

But others spoke in the Chronicle's defense. Some people said we were brave for writing about this sensitive topic. Others applauded the article's balance. It opened up windows of opportunity to talk with their children about sex, they said. Still others thought the article was well written. They said the problem should be solved; our writing shouldn't be attacked.

Over the next few days, newspaper staffers were interviewed on television and discussed on a radio talk show. They were written about in two area newspapers as well as praised and ridiculed on the Internet.

The most critical one is the importance of the First Amendment and its defense. It is vital that citizens be free to speak and hear the truth. Freedom of the press is a right that many of us used to take for granted.

We've also learned to accept constructive criticism. This is how we improve. While we need always to defend our journalistic responsibilities, ethics and our work, we need also to recognize that we have so much more to learn.

Finally, we learned that as journalists, we bear an awesome responsibility to our readers. While this was never a mandate that we took lightly, today we recognize the need for even greater accountability because readers demand it, as well they should.

Admittedly, when we wrote the "friends with benefits" article, we never anticipated so much publicity. We simply wrote the truth, and that's what we'll continue to do.

This is cache, read story here