Sure, An Anchor In The Field May Deliver Ratings — But It’s Also Good Journalism

In today’s New York Times, Nicholas Kristof says Bob Woodruff “wasn’t simply executing some business side policy when he was injured; he was practicing journalism.” He writes:

“I’m uncomfortable with the tone of some of the coverage of Bob Woodruff and ABC. Part of it is that the coverage is so largely focused on this being a blow to ABC News — which is true, but seems a bit secondary to the blow to Woodruff himself and his family. But more important, the backdrop of the reporting sometimes contains the implication that Woodruff’s reporting from Iraq or elsewhere was a business strategy to woo viewers. Look, I don’t doubt that the business side felt that it was good for ratings to have an anchor out in the field – but, above all, it was good journalism.

He concludes: “I’m afraid all this carping about the damage to ABC will make it less likely that other TV anchors will actually get out in the field as well. (My challenge to Bill O’Reilly to join me in Darfur is still open). Instead of portraying Woodruff as some pawn of business executives, we should be celebrating him for trying, bravely, to go against the grain of today’s TV news shows and commit serious international journalism.”