• With: Judy Miller, Jim Pinkerton, Ellen Ratner, Monica Crowley

    SCOTT: OK, so that's what Kevin (sic) Whitlock really thinks. Is that a guy that Bob Costas -- I'm sorry, Jason Whitlock, pardon me, is that a guy that Bob Costas should be quoting?

    CROWLEY: No, and particularly, those comments, totally outrageous, comparing the NRA to the KKK, that kind of injection of race into this tragedy and this murder, it's totally out of place. What I find so incredible is that the press is not really focused on the fact that most of the moral outrage here has been directed toward the weapon, towards guns rather than to the actual killer. That's been a huge part of this story that's been missing.

    SCOTT: There are 100 million gun owners in this country. Hard to equate that with the KKK. Up next, controversy over a shocking image.


    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A man gets pushed to his death at a New York City subway stop. The tragic scene captured by a photo journalist, then published by The New York Post. Did the paper do anything wrong? Answers next on "News Watch."



    SCOTT: This is the scene on Monday after the death of 58-year-old Ki-Suck Han pushed by a homeless man onto the tracks in one of New York's busiest subway stations. The scene caught on video showing the two men arguing on the platform before the push. The victim's final moments also captured by a photo journalist and that image was used on the front page of The New York Post, a newspaper owned by the parent company of Fox News Channel. The use of that image, along with the headline "Doomed" caused plenty of controversy. Ellen was it appropriate?

    RATNER: Yes, actually, I think it was appropriate. I think those are very difficult decisions. I happen to have an erratic fear of being exactly in that position, pushed, and so I always hug something when I'm in the subway, so I make sure I'm not too close to the edge and I think people have to understand those dangers and I think The New York Post did the right thing by showing what can happen and how we now have to protect ourselves.

    SCOTT: But one of the questions, Monica, is should the photographer have dropped his camera and tried to help the guy up off the tracks?

    CROWLEY: Right, there are two big moral dilemmas here and Ellen, you just pointed to one, as whether or not The New York Post should have put that on a front page or published it at all. The second big moral dilemma is should that photographer have either put his camera down or taken pictures while he was trying to help or anybody else on that subway platform? But none of us were there.

    RATNER: He said he was flashing...

    CROWLEY: ... to try to warn the train, right, but none of us were there and you can't really pass a moral judgment. This whole thing transpired within 22 seconds. People tend to be paralyzed in the first couple of moments of something bizarre happening like this, where their brain is processing what's happening, so I don't fault the photographer.

    SCOTT: He also said that he couldn't physically get there in time, and even if he had he wasn't sure he wouldn't be able to, you know, lift the guy up.

    MILLER: He was also carrying 20 pounds of cameras and photography equipment on his back. We don't know how far he was from the platform. I do think the question stands, what about everybody else who was around him. Why didn't they help? But it's true, Monica, we -- none of us was there. None of us knows how much time he would have had to help and he has an obligation, first as a human being to try and help, but second to take the picture that is going to warn other people about this danger. There is no consensus in our profession about which comes first.

    Maybe there should be, your responsibility as a human being or a photojournalist, but until there is, I don't think we can pass judgment on him.

    PINKERTON: I agree on the pass judgment point, and that's why I'll just yield my moment to the memory of Wesley Autrey, who back in 2007 saw a guy land on the subway and then -- the guy was in convulsions and was about to be clobbered, and he jumped on top of the guy in between the tracks, held the guy down. The train went over both of them, they both lived miraculously unhurt. He did the right thing, that's for sure.

    SCOTT: The photo on the cover took a lot of heat in journalism circles, but a reminder that back in the 1960's, this photo ran on the covers of both the Washington Post and The New York Times. February 1968, the photo shows South Vietnamese National Police Chief, Brig General Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Viet Cong officer with a single pistol shot to the head. What's the difference?

    MILLER: Well, there's nothing that the photographer could have done to stop that assassination. I think there is a difference between an accident or being in a position to rescue someone and covering a political event where you risk having the gun turned on you if you step in to save the guy.

    PINKERTON: At one point, they would have restrained the photographer and then go back to shooting the guy.


    RATNER: Meanwhile, I do think that several of the journalism commentaries did say that journalists should decide ahead of time what they would do, not in every situation, but do you save the person or do you, do you take the photo? And that's an interesting question.

    SCOTT: But the question is that those papers put that story on the front page and had no qualms about what it showed.

    Next on "News Watch," a big royal announcement.



    LARA SPENCER, CO-HOST "GOOD MORNING AMERICA": What a joy to be here on this day of celebration here in England. Folks cheering and giving us thumbs up as they pass Buckingham Palace behind me, and the papers shouting out the great news. There is the picture on The Times. "We're Expecting."

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Outside the hospital, as you can see, the news of Kate's pregnancy is already a global sensation with news crews from all over the world here. The headlines and the reporting are already rampant.

    UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to the international media frenzy that the world's most famous royal fetus in waiting has attracted.


    SCOTT: The news coming earlier than expected that Prince William and his wife Kate are expecting. Yes. Now, the Duchess of Cambridge admitted to a hospital for morning sickness. That forced the early announcement. The news sparking a media frenzy and headlines like from The Times of London, "We're Expecting" and a nation's joy, a husband's nerves. Spoof Twitter accounts like this from @royalfetus, current status, "Dark in here, will update." And from @Iamroyalbaby, to @Prince_Harry. "So fourth in line now. How quaint."

    Earlier in the week, an Australian radio station made a prank call to the hospital where Kate was staying. The two radio DJ's faking British accents, fooled one of Kate's nurses into revealing her condition. The prank caused outrage by the royal family and the hospital and then on Friday, the media coverage turned dim. News that the nurse involved on the other end of that prank phone call was dead, a suicide. We'll have more as this story develops. Another bit of media mischief and a very dark end to what was supposed to be a joke. That is a wrap on "News Watch" this week. Thanks to Judy, Jim, Monica and Ellen. See you next week.

    Content and Programming Copyright 2012 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2012 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.