Ethical questions over the assassination photograph

Journalists' reflexes override fear. While people run away from bullets, journalists deliberately head toward the place where the bullets are coming from. The same happened on the evening the Russian Ambassador to Ankara Andrey Karlov was attacked. While everybody in the hall was running away, daily Hürriyet reporter Haşim Kılıç, Associated Press (AP) reporter Burhan Özbilici and daily Sözcü reporter Yavuz Alatan stayed regardless and continued to take photographs.

When the photos Haşim Kılıç took were broadcasted on the Hürriyet's website and on private broadcaster CNN Türk, it was only minutes into the attack. Turkey and the world saw the attack first through his eyes. Hürriyet used Kılıç's photos in its first editions. In the photo, the body of the ambassador was laying on the ground while the attacker was in the background with his gun. 

In city editions, this photo was replaced by Burhan Özbilici's photo because in his photo, the attacker was at the forefront; he is seen shouting with a gun in his hand and his other hand in the air while the body of the ambassador is in the background. The head of the body was hidden on the page layout.  

In my opinion, using this photograph was a correct decision. In this photograph, the face of the attacker was clearly seen but it pushed death to the background. It was a shocking picture of violence but it did not contain bloody and brutal details that would trigger distress on the reader. 

Some readers reacted and said that using this picture was disrespectful to the ambassador's family. It is a sad, a very sad picture but it is wrong to categorize it as disrespectful to the family. Other newspapers and TV stations in Turkey and in the world also used this photograph. 

The...