I can see how this episode would not be everyone's cup of tea. It wasn't mine either, to begin with. But as it continued, I realized how relevant the discussion still was today. Sadly, the problems continue, certainly where this show is set, in San Francisco, but in the other big cities as well. The panel, led by James Gregory, discuss whether someone should have come to the victim's aid &/or called the police. Not intervening directly, I can certainly understand. For starters, most women aren't physically strong enough to do battle with a male attacker. Even men would face great danger if the attacker were armed, as one "man on the street" pointed out. And now, today, there is the added danger that a "Good Samaritan" would face legal action if he injures the attacker. Yet the likelihood that the police will be there to protect us is less than ever.
The young man who eventually did intervene was honestly portrayed by Ed Begley, Jr. He admitted he was afraid when he went to the woman's aid. Most of us would be too. OTOH, not calling the police - that, I don't understand. I certainly would call the police if I thought the woman was in danger. Like another reviewer (who thought the show "preachy"), I too was there at the time, and I didn't understand such bystander inaction then anymore than I do now.
The panel also discusses the effect of widespread television coverage of such events: turning us into cynical spectators who merely watch such events. Of course, the media has gotten exponentially larger in the ensuing 50 years, and that characterization of us seems, to a large extent, to hold true. Granted, as Ironside argues, that's not true of everyone . . . And at least we get to watch him closing in on the killer; that's always fun.
While I found this to be a very thought-provoking episode, it was ultimately a depressing one. At least back when the show originally aired, one could hope things would get better. But 50 years on, we know they haven't.