today in dubai, it reigns supreme. it's higher than the eiffel tower and the chrysler building put together. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. hello everyone. i'm fredricka woodfield in atlanta. reliable sources will begin in a few moments. but first our top story at this hour. the latest on the search for flight 370. we're following two major new developments in the search for the missing plane. brand new details about the potential flight path of the plane after it dropped off malaysian military radar. a senior malaysian government source tells cnn it appears the plane went north and then around indonesian airspace. the source says that move may have been intentional to avoid radar detection.

in a search in the indian ocean, the focus is on the area where a chinese ship says it detected two pole signals. the signals heard friday and saturday were a little more than a mile apart. and right now, a british ship with advanced equipment is heading there to check it all out. an australian ship also picked up an acoustic noise, but in a different area to the north. officials can't verify that any of it is connected to the missing plane. i want to go straight to cnn's joe johns in kuala lumpur. the new route looks like the plane may have deliberately tried to avoid radar detection. that's what the report says. what does this mean for the investigation? >> the key words are radar avoidance, i think, fred. we've had suspicions, we've had indications, but this is the first time anyone has explicitly said this. it creates an inference for investigators that can still be overcome that someone in the

cockpit with command, control still intentionally took the plane in an area that skirted indonesian airspace. the next question is whether it was done, plain and simple, to avoid detection of indonesian radar. so this is a piece of information that tells us why the authorities continue to look closely at the flight crew on board flight 370. this also points away from the theories that the plane was somehow flying itself on autopilot and it gives them reason to ask whether someone who was at the controls of the plane was attempting to conceal it from indonesian radar. definitely a criminal investigation, fred. >> joe, this also gives authorities to continue on their route of this criminal investigation, it sort of adds some credence to it, if you will? >> i think it does add some credence to the investigation. you know, there are a variety of

theories. looking into the psychological factors, whether there were stress factors involved with the crew members, the flight crew on board flight 370. so this does lead and give us a little bit more information about why ner calling this a criminal investigation. >> is there a feeling that malaysian and indonesian officials knew this earlier and it's just that they are choosing now to release this publicly? or is this a new discovery? >> i don't think it's so much a new discovery, fred. because quite simply, indications of the very same thing and talked about them on the air. this is the first time someone has explicitly stated this and suggested that radar avoidance of detection might have been part of the whole scenario. >> wow. extraordinary. thank you so much joe johns from kuala lumpur. so the head of the

australian agency coordinating the search calls the detection of the signals "an important and encouraging lead" but he urged caution saying there is much work to do in confirming it. he also talked about the difficulties of tracking down the source of the underwater sounds. >> we go through a similar process when we go underwater. underwater, the environment is quite difficult. there are lots of occasions when noises will be transmitted over long distances depending on the temperature layers in the water and so on. so there's a complexity about working underwater that makes the task quite complex. >> all right. let's talk about the conditions now in the indian ocean there. as the search crews try to determine further whether these pings, these pulses are indeed

that of the wreckage, the missing plane. cnn's jennifer gray. jennifer, what kind much weather conditions are there as they continue to take to the high seas to do these underwater searches? >> it's not terrible. but now that they're dragging these things on the ocean surface, you need to have really calm conditions. you don't want a lot of wobble with those ships. definitely have waves out there, but not going to see those nasty high seas like we saw when the search area was farther to the south. we're watching a tropical cyclone. it's a weak one. it was packing winds at 40 to 50 miles per hour. it's sliding down to the south and east. waves right around the center about 16 feet. so that's pretty high. once you get into where the search area actually is, the seas definitely die down a bit. also watching that rain pull to the south, we'll have some cloud cover on top of the area over the next 24 hours or so before things start to clear out just a bit. but the good news, fred, is it looks like the winds are going to be down just a bit as well.

we're going to see winds anywhere from 10 to 20 miles per hour. maybe gusting up to 30 on the south end as that tropical cyclone passes. right within that search area, winds are going to be pretty decent at 10 to 20 miles per hour over the next two or three days. good news there. >> fairly good conditions. appreciate that. thanks so much, jennifer. 13 ships and a dozen planes are trolling the search zone with some headed to the area where that chinese ship detected pulse signals. joining us now from perth, australia, will ripley. will, when do we expect the assets to be in place? >> hey, freld. we know that the british ship, the hms echo is less than three hours away from the newly refined search area. they will be joining the chinese ship. this is the ship on friday and saturday possibly detected those pings underwater. they have much more advanced sonar technology. you don't need daylight for sonar to work. presumably, these crews are going to get right in this area,

start listening and see if necessity can also locate the sounds that this chinese ship located. australian authorities still have a lot of questions about the technology that the chinese crew use. how reliable is it? what exactly was heard? those are questions that can really only be answered once this ship arrives in the area. at the same time, fred, there's also the ocean shield which is some 350 miles away, currently investigating another sound. authorities here keeping more tight-lipped about that. so we don't know specifically what they heard or what they're looking for. the fact that they're keeping the shield in that location to listen shows that they're taking all of these leads equally seriously as they try to move this investigation forward. but still, no answers. we don't know yet what was found. >> will, you mean this ocean shield is investigating a different acoustic noise separate from what the chinese ship detected. is this a noise that the ocean shield detected and they're looking into it further, or another ship detected this?

>> this is a noise that the ocean shield and that towed pinger locator being dragged almost at the surface, at the bottom of the ocean, this is a noise that this piece of equipment detected. so they've decided to keep the ocean shield in place for now to investigate what that noise is. but unlike the news report where from the chinese state news agency where it was basically announced to the world, this information involving the ocean shield, we're not getting a lot of information about that. i think there's a deliberate reason for that. i think the authorities in australia want to be careful not to give false hope or put out a false lead before we know what it is. we owe it to the 239 people and their families. >> ripley, thanks so much in perth, australia. let's get to richard quest in new york. first, richard, we'll talk about the pulse detection in a moment and how difficult that's getting. first let's talk about the

reports the flight may have intentionally avoided radar detection there. does this further cement the criminal investigation. does it also kind of rule out that there may have been mechanical failure? >> no, it doesn't rule it out. it would be a foolish person to runoff to the horses because of it. it is further evidence of deliberate flying. but we don't know the reasons why. i think it's important that we don't add one and one and come up with half a dozen. we've had this this map for some weeks, so we've known that it did go via indonesia around the tip of banda aceh. the ma lalaysians are saying th believe it's criminal or nefario

nefarious. wise counsel suggests for the moment we take the fact and we leave it there. >> is it your feeling that malaysian authorities knew this for some time and needed to further investigate or this is indeed a new discovery? >> no, no. they've known this for weeks, we've known it for weeks. from the very first in march set, from the first diagram or map we got on the 25th of march, it had the turn out to the west and down to the south. so we've -- in fact, on this network many of us have commented that it was an interesting aspect that the plane was skirting the northern coast of indonesia and questioning whether that was for radar avoidance purposes. but this is the first time somebody from malaysia has been prepared to say, yes, that is one of the factors that's leading them to lead towards criminal behavior. >> and how might one know a pilot know or is it common knowledge about creating a

flight plan to skirt radar detection? >> well, they know where radar is. any pilot who has flown these areas will know exactly the limit of the radar. they get handed from one radar zone to the next. anybody certainly would know the limits. i must say, if you look at the map and if we run the animation again, i think it's a long shot that it would have skirted radar simply because this is highly sensitive area. it's the northern part of indonesia, it's near the coast with thailand. there are countries there. he'd have had to -- what flight level would he have flown that indonesia would not have seen -- they would have seen him here, as it turns. we don't know the details, but i think it's a stretch to say that it would have been successful to have skirted and avoided radar. >> really quickly, in about ten seconds or less, the pulse

detection. are you encouraged by what's taking place? >> i remain skeptically optimistic. >> thank you very much. reliable sources begins right after this. g to keep our country in the lead. ♪ load! we keep moving to deliver what you need. and that means growth, lots of cargo going all around the globe. cars and parts, fuel and steel, peas and rice, hey that's nice! ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪

good morning. i'm brian stelter. it's time for reliable sources. we have a great show ahead for you today. wie just heard the latest on malaysia flight 370 n a few minutes, i have an angle on this still missing plane that no one has talked much about. i'll be taking a close look at how one of the biggest stories was spun, spun, spun by commentators that just didn't want to believe it. but up first, i feel like i've spent all week writing about the revolving door of television. on thursday, i and all the media reporters like me were caught off guard by david letterman who told his equally surprised studio audience that he's going to retire sometime next year. >> sometime in the not too distant future, 2015 for the love of god in fact, paul and i will be wrapping things up and taking a hike. [ applause ] >> right at that moment, speculation began about who is going to be his late night successor. there was also lofts talk about the future of morning tv.

when abc's top-rated "good morning america" started on monday morning, one cast member vanished. you probably heard. josh elliott quit the night before to join arch-rival nbc. why wasn't he back on the show at all? as one source said, he's crossing enemy lines. this source called nbc the sworn enemy of abc. it's true, gma and the "today" show have been battling for first place status for decades. elliott's move is a big deal. i wrote a book about morning tv last year and i can't come up with any other example of a co-host of one of those shows immediately moving to the other network. now, technically, elliott's only joining nbc sports, not the "today" show. but every source i have and every person in the industry that follows this stuff thinks he's in line for matt lauer's chair on "today." people love these morning shows and late night shows too. they feel like the hosts are members of their own families. i wanted to talk to someone with

an anchor's eye view on all of this. i invited deborah norville who once hosted the "today" show and is now the host of inside edition. she joins me from new york. >> thanks, brian, how are you? >> i'm well. how are you? >> this is an interesting week. it is a big blip on monday and of course people are still talking about it. but how much is it going to impact the ratings at "good morning america"? i'll be interested to see what this past week's numbers are when they come out later this week. >> in the last two years or so, gma held up remarkably well no matter what happens. robin roberts went away because of her illness. she was away for six months and the show held up. she came back, the show held up. it's been doing well no matter what happens in the war between these two shows. >> one of the things that i haven't seen anybody comment about in everything going on the past week and that is we now have three network morning shows that are peopled, the majority

of the cast are women and arguably at one of those shows at "good morning america," you could say that the strongest player on the broadcast is, in fact, a woman. robin was elevated tremendously through the grace with which she handled her medical challenges. abc was incredibly sensitive to it. a lot of people believe the reason for the strength of that program is the way people have seen their challenges played out in a certain way and the way that robin and now recently amy robach has done with her breast cancer. >> she was promoted and replaced josh elliott on gma. what do you make of the fact that they're so female-centered, female-led right now? >> i know you're recently married. my guess is because of what you do, you get to control the clicker. in most houses in america, that's not how it works. mom is in charge, particularly in the morning. the morning programs are almost like the clock by which people's days are set. >> do you think that's changing in an age where people are

waking up with their phones maybe before they wake up with the tv set? >> yeah, they do. i think it is. i think that's one. reasons maybe it's not as big a story as it might have been five years ago or when ann curry left the "today" show. there was more angst and more tears shed when ann left. it appeared in that instance that matt lauer rightly or wrongly, a lot of people thought matt had something to do with it. in the case of abc, it appears that josh thought he was worth more money than abc was prepared to pay. abc said this is our best offer and we feel very confident that it's a great offer for you. josh and his team felt otherwise. he left of his own accord. it's not a situation where people can say, this guy was being pushed out. he made a business decision, nbc made a business decision in bringing him in. let me ask you a question. do you think it's a "today" show decision? >> well, you know, you're putting me on the spot mere. i don't think josh elliott's

just going to nbc for nbc sports. i think initially the negotiations were about news and sports, then they just talked about sports for a while because the "today" show has to appear not to be forcing somebody out. they had that terrible mistake with ann curry. whether they did the right thing or not, they did it the wrong way. i think it makes sense to have him come over initially for nbc sports. now that he's in the company, he could look at a "today" show job in six months, a year, two years from now. that would make the most sense. >> one of the things that's also interesting, you look at abc and nbc, and they both have a large number of individuals on their show. when i was a part of morning television, there was the host, the co-host, the weather person and the news reader. that was it. now you've got six, eight, depending how you want to tally up the various hours. people on these broadcasts as opposed to cbs which has had tremendous ratings growth with three players.

they don't even have a weather person. they depend on local affiliates to -- frankly, who cares what it's doing in california if you live in new hampshire. >> you've been on the "today" show and unceremoniously dispatched when the young katie couric took over. what's it feel like to be in that situation when the changes are taking place? what's it like behind the scenes? >> you have to write another book on that one, darling. one of the things i did, brian, i felt wounded when i left nbc. i've used the analogy that you're standing on the edge of a cliff and there are 10,000 people with bayonets coming your way. you look over the cliff and it's a river filled with ravenous crocodiles. do you wait for the bayonet guys or jump to the crocodiles. in my casey jumped to the crocodiles and miraculously managed to live. i've never really spoken about what was going on behind the scenes in any detail because, you know what, at the end of the day, i have been blessed to have a very long career.

this was 23 years ago. i'm still on television. the program i do is the number one syndicated news magazine in america. i've been able to have this career because i've been judicious about what i've said. so i will never speak ill of the people who have been my colleagues in the past and may well be my colleagues in the future. >> the other big news this week, david letterman announcing his retirement. how did you react when you heard the news on thursday? >> well, i was happy for dave. my gosh, what an amazing career he's had. i was a huge fan of his back when he had that very short live show during the daytime at nbc. i was working nights. i used to watch that show before i went to my very first tv reporting job way back when. i think you look at david letterman, you look at his career, he is truly one of the innovators in television today. a lot of guys, i think jimmy fallon is doing a fantastic show. and perhaps it's the strength of his show now that he's launched that's encouraged dave to say, you know what, the end of this contract cycle, let's let the

next generation have it. >> who should be the next host of the "today" show? >> a lot of the names are coming from the other incubator of television, cable tv. comedy central has stephen colbert and jon stewart who have been bandied about. other names out there i have seen as well. this is when it's fun for people like you. you get to speculate and talk to the folks you know behind the scenes and throw little things out there. and also people who cover the media like you can be very influential in teeing up some of those individuals. so who would you want to tee up, mr. stelter? >> well, chelsea handler's name came to mind because of her contract is up at e at end of this year. that would be a risky choice given how controversial she's been and how many fights she got into with e. then again, david letterman got into feuds with cbs, maybe that would make it fun. >> i'd hate to think the decision is being made just on gender. i say that as a woman. the decision being made should

be made, i think, on who is going to be the person who is right for the kind of show you want. if they think comedy sells at that time of night, i don't think they're wrong, they need to find the funniest, most innovative, most watchable, most gee whiz, wow, did you see that, let me check it out on you-tube person they can find. that component with fallon and the jimmys has been very, very big now in television. >> deborah norville, thank you so much for joining me. >> my pleasure. thanks for having me. what if you took two partisan talkers and tried to get them to drop the rhetoric and explain why the partisan news networks go crazy over obamacare. i will give it a shot in a new segment called red news/blue news right after this. don't go away. well, there is. [ male announcer ] it's called ocuvite. a vitamin totally dedicated to your eyes, from the eye care experts at bausch + lomb. as you age, eyes can lose vital nutrients.

ocuvite helps replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. now that's a pill worth taking. [ male announcer ] ocuvite. help protect your eye health. live in the same communities that we serve. people here know that our operations have an impact locally. we're using more natural gas vehicles than ever before. the trucks are reliable, that's good for business. but they also reduce emissions, and that's good for everyone.

it makes me feel very good about the future of our company. ♪ they're the days to take care of business.. when possibilities become reality. with centurylink as your trusted partner, our visionary cloud infrastructure and global broadband network free you to focus on what matters. with custom communications solutions and responsive, dedicated support, we constantly evolve to meet your needs. every day of the week. centurylink® your link to what's next.

so i tried depend it really made the difference between a morning around the house and getting a little exercise. hi-ya! and i tried a baking class. one weekend can make all the difference. unlike the bargain brand, depend gives you the confidence of new fit-flex® protection. it's a smooth and comfortable fit with more lycra strands. it's our best protection. take your weekend on with a free sample at depend.com

(music) defiance is in our bones. defiance never grows old. citracal maximum. calcium citrate plus d. highly soluble, easily absorbed.

welcome back. let's turn to a regular feature i call red news/blue news. i wore purple today for the occasion. let me explain what i want to do with it. there are very important issues, ones that face all of us that are turned into ugly slug-fests by partisan networks and websites. left leaning or right leaning talking heads put their own spin on stories until it's almost impossible to figure out what's true. they create bitter divisions in our country. the most dramatic example of red news/blue news that i can think of is obamacare. nothing else even comes close. this week the white house announced that it reached a goal many thought was way out of reach. more than 7 million people signed up for obamacare by the march 31st deadline. to a lot of people, this sounded like very good news. but not at fox news. there were anchors and commentators who said it was all

a lie. watch how jesse waters does it in this clip. he calls president obama a liar but never invokes his name. instead he does it by calling out the white house repeatedly. >> i actually think the white house is straight-up lying about these numbers. they're saying 7 million people signed up on the website that was broken for the last nine months. they really want us to believe this website is working to give us a legitimate number. they've lied about so many things, why wouldn't they lie about this? >> the whole thing is a ruse. i think they don't care how many people signed up, they being the obama administration. it's basically a stop on the weigh station to full government control of the medical industry. >> what do you think is worse? that or the celebrating that they seem to be doing at msnbc. check this out? >> fox news has to be feeling about this tall tonight. actually, they are so far away from the american people and what the needs of the desires are of our society, they're in

their little bubble and they're about this tall when it comes to their knowledge on health care and they have less belief in the american people. it is amazing. this is a huge night for this man right here. >> that 7.1, that 7 million number, that is not just something that critics of health reform and critics of the president said would never be met. it wasn't just republicans saying that 7 million number. it became a 6 million revised number would never be met. it's not just something republicans said would never happen. it's something that the beltway press said would never happen. >> now, i've said a bunch of times on this program that i'm glad fox news and msnbc both exist as point of view news channels. i think these segments about obamacare cry out for more reporting, less presuming. cnn sometimes guilty of this too, taking a hot button issue and turning it into a punch and judy show where awe put a liberal on one side and conservative on the other and let's go at it. that's exactly what i'm going to do right now with a twist. let's bring in on the left, marc

lamont hill, a cnn political analyst and host of huffington post live and on the right, ben ferguson, radio host and cnn commentator. both join me now. but forget your political leanings for a minute and address the issue like regular people. welcome to both of you. >> good to be here. >> good to be here. >> a lot of people don't follow this issue as closely as the three of us do. ben, let me start with you. what is it about this policy issue that so deeply divides people? >> it's divisive because there's a lot of people that thought it would be simple and easy and turned out not to be. we know that from the number of delays, the problems with the website, we know that from people who weren't able to keep their doctor or hospital in the neighborhood that they used to go to. people don't like change, they really don't like it when it comes to their personal health insurance or getting a cancellation notice or being forced to sign up for something. >> marc, do you agree that's the issue why it's divisive? >> yes to the point they don't like change, that's true.

they like the benefits of change. you see people and poll numbers bear this out for a number of years. people that don't like obamacare but they like every benefit from covering preexisting conditions, leaving their children on the health care plans longer. it's a divide because people say we're not supposed to like this but we do. as ben said, it's been a messy rollout. it complicates things further. >> ben, name one thing you like about it? >> i like the pre existing aspect of it. i think that's something that's very important and a lot of conservatives were in favor of. >> marc, i'm sure there's something you don't like about the giant law. >> not at all. i think it's flawless. obviously as a practical matter, the rollout was disastrous and totally foreseeable. in terms of the actual policy, i've been a single parent person from the beginning. we're getting universal health insurance not health care. which could make things more bloated and puts money in the coffers of the big corporations which is troublesome.

>> my question is this, the white house has still not answered this question. how many of the people they're claiming have signed up have actually paid for their first month of insurance. because if you don't pay, if you went on to the system, filled out a form but you don't pay for the service, you're not insured. that's a different argument, ben. the dominant right wing narrative has been that given the dysfunctional website, the lack of young people that want to enter this health care plan, there isn't a number of people that we can verify who actually signed up. what you have said, people signed up but we don't know if it's going to stick. that's a different argument than the white house making up people, producing false numbers. >> i'll put it this way. this is like when i take a test in the good old days of school and your parents say i did fine, i aced it. guess what, the real number when it comes in is what you actually did. that's the number that you get judged on. we as americans should be looking at the white house saying, okay, you can give us this exciting number, how many paid? that's the only number that should actually matter and did

people really sign up by paying? >> journalistically, that's the long-term story. the one we won't know answers to for a long time. that's one of the challenges when it comes to media coverage, whether partisan or tries to be objective of this story. it's that we won't really know the outcomes for a long, long time. >> that's true. the problem is in this news cycle, people are eager to get an answer within minutes and so immediately after the rollout, people are saying the rollout is a success. everything is working fine. despite the fact that the website was dysfunctional. on the other side, people were saying, the website is a disaster, there's no way the left -- the obamacare administration can get the adequate number of people signed up. we jumped to a quick story when we need to let it play out. as it plays out, 7 million was attainable. the next kwi that ben raises, will the numbers stick, will people pay the bill and will the numbers increase and will we get down to a lower number of maybe less than 50% of people uninsured by 2017?

it's doable. >> it also comes back to an issue of trust. i remember when kathleen sebelius was in front much congress and saying the white house and this website is working smoothly at the exact moment the website is down. even the president made fun of himself on how bad of a debacle it's been and until they start to have consistency and truth in numbers and truth in the website working, people will be skeptical. >> if by americans you mean fox news -- >> i'm cnn. i'm not fox news. >> i know you're not fox news. what i'm saying is the dominant narrative that we hear is people don't trust it. i hear news outlets say that. i'm not convinced they're one and the same. >> marc, what does it say about the liberal media or the objective media that the conservative media's mayor tiff has stuck so well about this program? >> i think it talks about the inability of producing a strong counter narrative. >> channels like msnbc? >> that's exactly what i mean.

i think msnbc hasn't produced a strong counter narrative. the right is more organized in messaging. for 12 months, you've heard young people won't sign up and it will be repealed when none of those things were true. i haven't seen msnbc say equal -- i don't want either narrative. i want a cnn narrative, a straight narrative of objective analysis. if we're going to be partisan, be on equal footing. >> it's not the media spinning it. it's the american people the cancellation and saying that their doctor, they can't keep them. that is real life for americans. that has nothing to do with the media. >> let me read from a column in the "washington post" a couple of days ago and have you react. he wrote this, "from now on will there be more healthy skepticism about conservative claims against the aca? given how many times the law's enemies said the sky was falling when it wasn't, will there be tougher -- given what you know

about the media, will there be more skepticism next time? >> for nine to 12 months they've told us the policy won't work, people won't sign up, likely to be repealed. none of knows things turned out to be true. yet we brought into -- places like the a.p. were pushing this as something requiring someone to walk on water for a 6 million sign-up to happen. it wasn't true. we need to be more skeptical. >> ben, i'm guessing you do think the sky did somewhat fall even if these numbers turn out to be right? >> i mean, skepticism is always a good thing. there are also facts that are indisputable hire. the president said if you like your doctor, you can keep it. that's not true. the president said if you like your plan, you can keep it. that also is not true. the president has said the website was working when, in fact, it wasn't working including kathleen sebelius. >> that's where we leave it. marc lamont hill, ben ferguson, thanks for being with us. >> thank you. something that reporters dread having to do. that is, call grieving families

and ask them to talk. is it ethical or is it exploitation? cnn's carol costello is here to answer, next. i'm on expert on softball. and tea parties. i'll have more awkward conversations than i'm equipped for, because i'm raising two girls on my own. i'll worry about the economy more than a few times before they're grown. but it's for them, so i've found a way. who matters most to you says the most about you. at massmutual we're owned by our policyowners, and they matter most to us. ready to plan for your future? we'll help you get there. to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again.

and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve. ♪ [ male announcer ] look for the easy-open red arthritis cap.

♪ do you have a minute to think ok, how about thirty seconds? at comcast business our internet is fast. up to 5x faster than dsl from the phone company. and our phone's better too. switch to comcast business internet. then add voice and tv for just $34.90 more per month. time to make the call. 800-501-6000 comcast business. built for business. many of my patients still clean their dentures with toothpaste. but they have to use special care

in keeping the denture clean. dentures are very different to real teeth. they're about 10 times softer and may have surface pores where bacteria can multiply. polident is designed to clean dentures daily. its unique micro-clean formula kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains, cleaning in a better way than brushing with toothpaste. that's why i recommend using polident. [ male announcer ] polident. cleaner, fresher, brighter every day. ♪ welcome back. any time tragedy strikes, whether it's a missing plane full of hundreds of people or the shooting we saw at ft. hood this week, there are victims. and there are family members and friends of the victims and reporters who are assigned to go and tell their stories. any reporter who has told you,

it's an awful thing to have to call and knock on the door of a mother or a sister or a son who has just lost someone they love. those calls are sometimes met with rage. here's the thing. more often we're met with open arms by families who want to talk about their loved ones who want the world to see a human face behind the terrible headlines. cnn's carol costello has been in that position many times in her career and this week she wrote an op-ed about it. she joins me now from chicago. thanks for joining me. >> any time, brian. thanks. you mentioned to me off camera you were nervous to write about this. why is that and what do you want viewers to know about how the media treats victims and families of victims? >> i was nervous to write this op-ed. it's a difficult topic. i don't think that people really understand it unless they're in it. at face value it seems incen insensiti insensitive. how could anyone approach

someone in their most psychic pain and ask them "how they feel." journalists do that all the time. it's actually part of our jobs. when i saw the families of those aboard that malaysia airlines jetliner and they were collapsing and screaming out their psychic pain and doctors were taking them away on stretchers, those images, they made me sick to my some stomach. i found them -- the victims marching on the malaysian embassy in china demanding answers for their loved ones, those images made me proud because that's really our job, to give voice to the voiceless. power to the powerless. we could take the families demand and put them on a global stage and force the malaysian government to act, which it did. >> but i wonder if you can't have one without the other. if you can't have the wonderful images of them going to protest

without those intrusive images. well, i don't think there's any right or wrong answer to that. because emotion is so powerful and honestly you don't really know whether victims want to talk. >> now, i will say at the time this was breaking and it was live. sometimes you make bad decisions when there's live breaking news. but later when you're able to step back, you should, as a responsible journalist, say, how much is too much and should we show these images again and again and again? and in my personal opinion, and i guess my professional opinion as a journalist, we should be very stingy in those kinds of images that are portrayed on television. >> your op-ed got so many reactions this week. the most favorite comment was this one. it's about ratings and profit, this person wrote. i can't read it all. there was a curse word in it. news organizations don't care about the grieving family members whose faces they're shoving their cameras into. it's about ratings and profit.

but what do you say to that commenter? >> um i think part of that is fair. but i will say viewers watch. they watch in droves. so i would say to that gentleman who wrote that comment to my op-ed, viewers are in part to blame. because they want to hear too and it's not just because they're being exploiters themselves. it's because when we hear victims' stories, it helps us make sense of the world. in other words, when we hear victims' stories and we hear how that victim reacted to what happened to them, it helps us make sense of the world. it helps us see that there is hope -- that there is such a thing as survival and there is such a thing as going on. >> another commenter on the op-ed wrote this, when my brother killed himself, a journalism student from the university of iowa actually live to the hospital and told him she was his sister to try to get the story.

thankfully, the hospital did not go along with it. that makes me think that this is so much about although there's a lot of blurriness in the middle. that's clearly wrong. lying get a story that would not pass muster. >> look, brian. in every business there are bad apples. there are bad journalists, just like there are a lot of bad bankers in the world. every business has people who shouldn't be working in that business and journalism is no exception. most of my colleagues, most of the people i've noun in my 30 years in broadcasting are very sensitive, they are, and they loathe picking up that phone and calling someone in the midst of like personal pain. they don't want to do that. but it is part of their job. but i will add this caveat. there'd better be a good journal is it reason for us to call. we shouldn't call to ask how you feel. there's got to be a reason for

that. that's where the journalist exhibits response behavior. >> carol costello, thanks for sharing your story with me and sharing your op-ed with us. >> any time. >> we have to take a break. we'll tell you how a twitter account opened the eyes of people in seay. the most capty vatted photos of the week right after this. peace of mind is important when you're running a successful business.

so we provide it services you can rely on. with centurylink as your trusted it partner, you'll experience reliable uptime for the network and services you depend on. multi-layered security solutions keep your information safe, and secure. and responsive dedicated support meets your needs, and eases your mind. centurylink. your link to what's next.

♪ led to the one jobhing you always wanted. at university of phoenix, we believe every education- not just ours- should be built around the career that you want. imagine that. ♪ hooking up the country whelping business run ♪ ♪ build! we're investing big to keep our country in the lead. ♪ load! we keep moving to deliver what you need. and that means growth, lots of cargo going all around the globe. cars and parts, fuel and steel, peas and rice, hey that's nice! ♪ norfolk southern what's your function? ♪ ♪ helping this big country move ahead as one ♪ ♪ norfolk southern how's that function? ♪

these days, everything is done on the internet. and tomorrow you'll do even more. that's what comcast business was built for. slow dsl from the phone company was built for stuff like this. switch to comcast business internet. then add voice and tv for just $34.90 more per month. and you'll be ready for tomorrow today. comcast business. built for business.

welcome back. now to something called show me a story because pictures are the most reliable stories. let's look at some that did just that this week starting with one from venezuela where violent protests against the government has been going on for months. here a demonstrator turns a hurled tear gas canister into a game of baseball, attempting to swat at the canister with his makeshift bat, a powerful photograph and such a striking contrast with what was going on here in this country the very same day, the americans enjoying the annual right of spring, opening day of baseball season. and another kind of story came with the photography of 17-year-old grammy-winning singer lourde. take a look at it. she spotted this one and then another. still beautiful but her skin and her makeup, not perfect. the message she sent out with that second shot was, remember,

it's okay to have flaws. >> and there's no better example of powerful pictures this week that then. he e with us with president obama when he traveled to saudi arabia and during a brief photo op she snapped these pictures with her i phone. twig never the country caught fire. many saudis had never seen the inside of the king's palace and that's what she was showing them. brown gained lots of followers on twig when she posted these pictures. this was big news. and look at this picture, king abdullah talking to president obama. for many people this was the first time they realized their king needed oxygen. that is the power of a picture. and finally this picture. it's pulitzer prize-winning photographer an ja. on friday we learned she had been killed in afghanistan. she was working for the

"associated press." she was covering an updebting presidential election when an afghan police officer opened fire. she was killed instantly. her colleague was wounded. let me close today's program with the words of gary pruitt, chief executive of ap. as conflicts spread urlt aurnld the world journeyism has grown more dangerous. where they're seen as the eyes and ears of crucial information, today they're often targets. he concluded his note to staff by saying this. this is a profession of the brave and the passionate, those committed to the mission of bringing to the world information that is fair, accurate, and important. anja met that definition in every way. we will miss her terribly. i hope to see you back here next sunday. "state of the union" with candy crowley starts now.

sunday morning's questions. are those underwater sounds that searchers are detecting the pings from black boxes on flight 370? and did someone deliberately fly this 777 on a path designed to avoid indonesian radar? today after four weeks coming up empty, new clues with an abundance of caution. >> this is an important and encouraging lead, but one which i urge you to continue to treat carefully. >> the race to find the black boxes before the batteries die on their audio signal. and then running against all odds. how democrats push for a november miracle. >> are democrats going to take back the house this year? >> well, of course. we have great candidates. >> democratic leader nancy pelosi on midterm politics, double standards for win in power and if they deserve a raise. we focus on that and president