Two questions:
Why is no one asking about the distinction of reporting vs. editorializing these (and other) events?
When did reporting objectively on a pertinent subject become subject to debate on weather or not it was ethical? I'm not asking to be snarky, I would actually like to know what the tipping point was.

The news blackouts exist and always existed in the US media and they affect major corporate players whether NYT, WP, Tribune Co and others (one can google the story of now infamous CIA-operative in Pakistan that shot two people and how it played out vs Pakistani and international media).It is also rather ironic that Mr Simon is now riding his high horse about "protecting journalists" as in effect he is achieving just the opposite. In March 2013 I was on the Turkish-Syrian border in the refugee camps and it was a common knowledge the western journalists are being kidnapped for money. The ones who did not know that have to be completely out of the loop and wilfully ignorant (the best qualifiers for foreign reporting nowadays when one looks at "quality of reporting or rather managing of news from many trouble spots),indeed). What is the real issue here while not discussed is wilful and deliberate exploitation of media organizations and companies of willing schmucks for free or next to nothing: (hello American Public Media, Huff-Po,The Atlantic, Christian Science Monitor for offers of working for nothing or in case of the latter for a whooping $100 per story). There is even a recognized player in the industry that dreams big such as Global Post, whose journalist was recently executed. They had a very generous offer of $1000/month (yes it includes your all of reporting costs so you might as well cut a check to the great GP instead of working for minus $). Ironically this pressure come from editors and executives that once upon a great time ago were journalists themselves and now are pulling 6 (six-figure) salaries while finally making it on the journalistic plantation. The bottom line here is: it is all about new journalistic feudalism that unfortunately has many willing participants to be serfs who themselves think of the experience as stars in international reality show. However if the episode ends with the quick pull of sharp knife around someone's neck while U-tubed then the event gets even more hits with more participants willing to commit uncommitable. Mr Simon and Garfield can pontificate on this phenomenon from safety and warmth of the respective offices and studios but it doesn't change the fact that what is effectively a news crowd sourcing by another name is just a new dress-up for an old cliché: "there is sucker born every minute". Hey, you want to buy a journalistic bridge?

Bob Garfield states "New organizations, of course, try to keep their distance from governments." The exact opposite is actually true in the US as Garfield himself covered in the episode entitled "Watchdogs in Tuxedos".