0 and that apparently is not true. >> we are just speculating, but this is experience speculation. >> cbs' john miller reported the shooter was a man who wasn't at the navy yard. his id was found near the actual killer, aaron alexis. cbs tweeted, we are retracting our report that harvey chance was the navy yard shooter. nbc calling chance the shooter as well. they said we are now retracting that report and deleting those tweets. has the news business again fallen short in time of crisis? joining us now as she does every week lauren ashburn. juan williams and amy holmes who anchors real news at the "the blaze." they make these mistakes again and again. i don't understand the rush to report unconfirmed details. >> reporters want it first before they want it right in many instances. the penalty for making a mistake is almost nonexistent in this day of social media and information we receive. there is no context. you want it out there quickly. it used to be that there were big libel suits anytime a big mistake was made. when was the last time you saw a really large libel suit over a media error? the punishment just isn't there. you take down the story or you update the story and that's it. >> i wonder whether this fellow, chance, will decide to hire a lawyer. he spoke to greta and let's see what he had to say about being named wrongly as a mass murderer. >> how do you feel about all of this? >> i feel upset. i feel that my privacy was violated. i felt like my whole world was turned up shied -- turned upside down and now i am left with trying to put it back together. >> so there are consequences to these erroneous reports. >> absolutely. can you imagine the nightmare of being named as a mass shooter? they say where do you get your reputation back. the media did correct it almost meedly, within minutes or hours. and because of social media and because of stwitter and getting information out quickly it was quickly ect cred, but his name is still in the public dough dosh dosh domain. >> newtown there was a mistake. law enforcement is confused themselves and have piecemeal or inaccurate information. >> correct. i will say i differ with lauren about the consequences. i think john king at cnn, i think his career was hurt by the fact that he came out with misinformation during that boston episode. >> king was arrested and in fact he was not. >> they didn't penalize him. >> i don't know exactly because i don't know the internals, but my impression was john wishes he had not made that error. >> of course, nobody wants to make that. >> in that boston situation, there were two young men who were named as suspects and pictures were on the front of the paper, and they had filed suit. they were charging they were defamed by the act. >> that was the new york post. >> but it is not the norm. >> is there too much focus in each of these terrible tragedies on the shooters, motivation, how he was growing up and not enough on the victims? >> i think a lot of us would agree that in boston that was definitely the case. you saw the shooter on the cover of "rolling stone" and a lot of people had to pull that off. in this instance, we didn't see continuation of coverage on the whole event and throughout the week. it ended on tuesday. there are stories that continued on gun control and other issues, but maybe part of it is we figured out quickly who the shooter was in this case and that he had mental issues and he was hearing things from walls and microwaves and maybe we understood who he was, and we didn't want to report on anything else. >> i think there are larger issues here we have to deal with in terms of media. the proliferation of social media, twitter. you showed these people saying we are sending a twitter or deleting a twitter. what are you doing? what you are doing is responding to pressures to get it first and get out there. they have nothing to report. they know nothing. it is not just media. it is also law enforcement. you get people at the fringes of law enforcement and not in the direct line of command who want to appear to be more important. they are talking to reporters and feeding reporters information that is misinformation. >> the first day's coverage -- that is a good point. >> why is it considered having an agenda. lets leave the commentators aside and piers morgan aside. you say this is an important issue in america. there are reasonable endorsements like republican senator pat toomey and background checks at gun shows. let's have a full debate. why that as opposed to dealing with a new issue? >> joe biden said part of the approach is to look at mental illness. where did that go? >> amy says the media has an agenda on gun control and i say some commentators do. what they are trying to do is have a debate and it is a critical debate. >> i don't know how you get away from it. this story does breech some of those issues. what we learned is this man had psychiatric issues. people were aware of it. nonetheless he was able to go out and buy a gun. when you talk about reasonable steps that were endorsed by toomey and others and the american people, they talk about requiring background checks for on-line purchases of guns, requiring that people who -- >> but what about the story about mental illness? was he getting proper troament? treatment? how could he fall through the cracks as looney bird. let me say, if you want to have an i'd logical argument and not what how we was talking about -- >> how about gang violence in chicago? >> i am on your side. we should cuff that in terms of -- we should cover it because it is more common. i saw a poll saying people say after newtown let's have more gun control and now they say nra and gun -- people opposed to guns they never lose on capitol hill. they have capitol hill locked down. >> i am unarmed, but i have to separate you two because i want to turn to one more question. the day after this happened on monday, i thought like after boston and like after newtown i thought there would be saturation of coverage and after a day or two the media was turning away. >> the next morning gma had an interview with britney spears. not only did we move obut we moved on in 12 hours. >> what explains that? >> add. reporters have a.d.d. we left to go to the navy yard coverage and then we fled that to go to the obama showdown coverage. it is hard on reporters and hard in the limited amount of time you are given on cable news to keep addressing deeper issues. >> isn't it also because they know there is no traction on capitol hill. there is no follow-up on that angle and it was not a conspiracy. it was clearly a man with mental health issues. >> one in four people in this country are diagnosed with mental health disorders every year. >> maybe i feel this because it felt like it was in this neighborhood and maybe it was on a military base and they said it could have been me in a movie theater. a shooter shows up. i have to suspect there is also a certain numbness in the media and in the country. >> that is the heart and soul of it. it is a depressing story and so much of what we do in the media is info-tainment. you can play at the heart strings and i don't think the media felt it and the people didn't and it is a shame. >> there is one silver lining in terms of our security and protection. a lot of these shooters are inspoired by media coverage. >> they didn't want the coverage too. they wanted to move away because they don't want this conversation. >> you will have to continue this outside. i have to move to the next segment. the relationship between the president and the press has turned downright chilly. is the romance really over?