This was the question posed by a senior colleague of mine at the Radio Festival in Glasgow this week. Jeff Zycinski, head of radio at BBC Scotland said he had been reduced to tears by newspaper coverage of the troubled singer - who has just made a much-talked about appearance at Glastonbury.
Jeff explains: "the pictures of Amy Winehouse are a form of pornography...if we put these stories on air, if we read these stories, aren't we in some way complicit in this woman's destruction? I have wept over pictures of Amy Winehouse."
Jeff went on to argue, in front of a gathering of radio executives and staff from commercial and BBC sectors, that we should do more stories about 24-year-old women a mile east of the city centre, who are daily destroying themselves on drink and drugs and put that at the top of the news agenda.
Strong stuff. So are we in those areas of the BBC that have covered this story guilty of causing Amy's destruction and using her as a type of porn?
Well, no, I don't believe we are.
For younger audiences across Britain - like it or not - the lives of celebrities are a daily talking point: across offices and shops in Britain: these are water-cooler moments from which a modern BBC can no longer stay stuffily aloof.
Of course, different networks will take different views - not for a moment am I suggesting that this is the Today programme or the Ten O'Clock News fare. But for young facing networks like Radio 1 to ignore the off-stage antics of some of our biggest acts from Amy to Britney and beyond would be extremely odd, to say the least.
In January, we relaunched our website, with improved entertainment news coverage and watched our monthly page impressions jump from around 300,000 to more than 4 million in the space of 4 months - the bulk of these hits were for entertainment news coverage.
The trick is we mustn't do every story - we need to tackle those we select with the same editorial rigour as we would for any other news - and be mindful of the impact on individuals our coverage might have.
For example, I gave to the festival an example of the sort of stuff we would never pick up from the red-tops. Wednesday's Sun had a no-holds-barred account of Amy's alleged recent activities which we wouldn't touch with a barge pole - even if we could stand it up.
Nor have we followed widespread newspaper speculation about the state of Madonna and Guy Ritchie's marriage - not a second of coverage, until today - when they issued a denial statement and we dutifully reported it.
As I told the festival, we are not remotely interested in doing bedroom or intrusive private life stuff: it's got to be in the public domain first, we've got to have done a proper journalistic job on investigating whatever the story is - and we must be responsible in our coverage.
It's also worth remembering that both broadcast and written media are frequently tipped off about celebrity activities and appearances by the stars' publicity people themselves: I'm keen not to get drawn into this "game". Nor do we collude with press officers to agree safe "questions" in advance of interviews that won't embarrass the celebs themselves as part of a deal.
We should be fair dealers - most of all to our audience. If our audiences hear it, they have a right to believe it's more than second hand gossip or tittle tattle copped off the tabloids.
It's also true that some of the issues raised by the Britney and Amy stories have proved useful ways in to discuss in a wider way issues such as drug-taking, binge drinking and eating disorders. Online and on-air we've been able to supply fact boxes, credible advice and helpline information for people who feel they may in a similar dilemma - especially to those without the deep pockets to opt for the Priory option.
On a lighter note - we staged a fictional scenario at the Radio Festival: you can try our editorial dilemma. I won't tell you which way I voted, but please tell me what you could do if you were in my shoes. I'll post a blog later to let you know what I said.
We have an interview with Gordon Brown at Downing Street - it's one to one - pre-arranged and ready to be done. Suddenly, the newsdesk gets a call from Amy Winehouse saying she has a "very important" announcement to make but that we must send a reporter immediately to her home. Our only available reporter is at Downing Street...so do we cancel Brown for Winehouse?