EDITORIAL : CUT THE CHASE; TV NEWS EDITORS SHOULD EXERCISE MORE JUDGMENT ON WHEN TO BROADCAST LIVE.

THE horrifying suicide of Daniel V. Jones, 40, of Long Beach on live television is a defining moment for the media and its responsibility in covering the news.

When Los Angeles' TV stations interrupted regular programs Thursday afternoon to televise another freeway traffic incident, producers and news editors had no way of knowing how it would end.

Which cuts to the heart of the debate facing television.

Within minutes of Jones' truck bursting into flames, viewers witnessed his dog being incinerated, the distraught man catching fire, pulling off his trousers and, remaining half naked, threatening to leap to his death from an overpass, then grabbing a rifle and shooting himself to death.

The incident outraged parents, in particular, because KTTV-TV (Channel 11) and KTLA-TV (Channel 5) broke into kiddie cartoon time.

KTLA-TV ran a graphic indicating a breaking story was about to pre-empt the children's show. That wasn't enough.

Precisely because journalists and camera crews hovering overhead in a helicopter cannot anticipate every move, they are highly exposed and vulnerable to stage-managed stunts and tragic outcomes.

Live coverage has become so standard and predictable for freeway chases, Jones was virtually assured of a big TV audience when he stopped traffic on a major freeway and unfurled a banner attacking HMOs.

We might never know whether Jones had suicide in mind when he embarked on his 15 minutes of macabre fame.

But precisely because life is so unpredictable, editors and producers need to re-examine the moment-to-moment live coverage afforded these kinds of events.

Is the public really well-served by stations interrupting regular programming and broadcasting live coverage virtually every time there's a car chase or similar freeway incident?

Cheryl Fair, news director at KABC-TV (Channel 7), defended her station's coverage as based on two major freeways closed down during rush-hour traffic. That is a bona fide argument for coverage - some level of coverage.

Television has a legitimate and vital role to quickly inform the public.

During last year's North Hollywood shootout, for example, the coverage that captivated and shocked us also enlightened us on the deadly dangers facing Los Angeles police officers and the proper force needed when neighborhoods are under siege.

And for people in that area who were trapped in a tense and terrifying situation, television played an integral role in keeping them informed and out of harm's way.

So to say that no live coverage is ever warranted robs the public of a tremendous service. TV stations must have the final word.

But television's powerful reach and universal appeal require news executives to exercise more diligence and better judgment, and worry less about ratings. That's especially important when stations interrupt children's programming to broadcast live, potentially deadly events.

When TV news executives show every chase live and indiscriminately, they are inviting deranged, disturbed and desperate people to control the airwaves.

As sad as Thursday's tragedy was, it presents an opportunity for L.A.'s TV stations to reconsider their practices.

In some instances, like this one, the public would be better served with fewer live pictures, and more thorough and thoughtful reporting.