War correspondent Mike McRoberts and the battle of social journalism

Mike McRoberts carries a little girl in Haiti. Photo / Supplied

Some are calling him "the brown Jesus". Others are calling him a "hero" and a "legend", but TV3 correspondent Mike McRoberts has waded in to his own battle about a reporter's role in a disaster zone from that of passive bystander to intervening stakeholder.

On last night's TV3 news, McRoberts, who is in Haiti to report on the devastation wreaked by the recent earthquake, was seen carrying a five-year-old Haitian girl around hospital grounds to receive the right medical treatment.

He had found her at a relief camp with a broken arm and an infected leg. She hadn't been treated since the earthquake, McRoberts reported, and there was worry she may lose her leg. The TV3 reporter and his crew were apparently the only ones at the camp with a vehicle, so they stepped in to help.

McRoberts' actions became the story, which prompted a discussion on whether reporters should stay detached from the stories they report or not.

McRoberts took to his blog on the TV3 website to argue his case.

"Clearly I have no problem with journalists stepping into a story," McRoberts blogged. The whole 'a journalist must stay detached' stuff is just crap.

"I've always said that I'm a human being first and a journalist second, and if I'm in a position to help someone I will.

"In saying that I don't think a journalist should be the story either. Unfortunately too many reporters these days seem to get the two things confused?" McRoberts wrote.

I would argue McRoberts is one of them. Of course, it is obvious Mike's actions undoubtedly saved that little girl, but in doing so he changed the outcome of the story. He became the story.

But what are the rules of engagement? Should news reporters adhere to the strict journalistic standards of objectivity and non-intervention and remain impartial bystanders and witnesses, merely reporting and recording the facts? Or should they put down their microphones and cameras and offer their assistance?

Professor Roger Simpson from the University of Washington, where he founded the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma, believes there is a confused expectation on journalists that places them with a heavy burden.

"The confusion, Simpson says, "rests in large part on the news industry's demands that its employees stand aloof from what they cover - an effort to assure audiences of reporters' fairness and objectivity."

He adds: "In recent years, however, detachment and objectivity have come under sharp attack - most powerfully from advocates of "civic" or "public" journalism, who argue that if media outlets want to rebuild their declining audiences and public trust, journalists must actively contribute to community life rather than serve as detached spectators."

In his book Dispatches From the Edge, CNN correspondent and anchor Anderson Cooper admitted that the failure of authorities to respond to Hurricane Katrina challenged his commitment to journalistic detachment.

"I feel connected to what's around me, no longer just observing," Anderson wrote.

I appreciate McRoberts' intervening actions probably saved that little girl. He saw someone in trouble and felt compelled to help. How could he not? But it is my opinion, that in doing so, he was also fulfilling a self-serving purpose to tell his story. Had he just recorded what he saw, he may have intervened in the most effective way possible.