Catch and kill is the practice by a media outlet to buy the right to a negative story about someone and not publish it so that the story doesn't go public.
Suppose this technique was used by a newspaper regarding a negative story about a presidential candidate, then that might constitute a campaign contribution. Indeed, the Federal Election Committee (FEC) states:
A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:
According to Wikipedia, campaign contributions have to be reported to the FEC, which publishes a database of those contributions.
If the aforementioned practice is indeed a contribution, to what extent does it have to be disclosed (by the newspaper) and to what extent does the FEC publish about the contribution?
Specifically, does the contribution disclosure only include the amount of money involved (assuming the amount is high enough that it requires disclosing) or does it have to be so detailed that it reveals the catch and kill practice?
In the comments, it has been pointed out that there have not yet been any court rulings on this matter. Since the subject has been in the news a lot, is there a consensus among (legal) scholars regarding the questions above? If there is no consensus, what reasons are there for the difference in opinion?