Yes, according to Garvey.
James Garvey writes in the Guardian:
A lie is a lie. There may be other considerations, but that’s main motivation behind the condemnation of Peter Gleick, the scientist who used an assumed name to obtain documents produced by the Heartland Institute.
He’s been criticised for a lack of scientific integrity, and those who fund his post are “concerned about any allegations of unethical conduct”. Everyone is having a go at Gleick, including Gleick: he called his actions a lapse of “professional judgment and ethics”. Are his actions wrong just because he lied?…
Did Gleick go too far? I’m not sure he did, but I do wonder whether some climate scientists go anywhere near far enough.