Because our supposedly objective non-biased MSM loves nothing more than making itself the subject of the story. Newsman goes to war zone and gets wounded? That's a real dog-bites-man story AFAIC.
In the midst of a two-month reporting trip in Iraq in 2005, I stopped at the Balad emergency hospital, toured it for an hour and interviewed a dozen doctors and nurses. I couldn't find a news hook to write about it, so I didn't.
Yet literally every day the press finds a "news hook" in another casualty, another death, or yet another suicide bomber.
They harp and moan falsely about the "overcrowding" in military field hospitals in Iraq. They focus on the news from three years ago, about under-equipped troops and under-armored Humvees (during my 6 months at Balad I never saw troops without body armor and only a small handfull of Humvees that haden't been up-armored).
Yet this journo spends time in Balad and doesn't realize that he's standing in one of the most advanced and effective field hospitals the military has ever deployed. And it stands in front of one of the most efficient and thorough medical evacuation units on earth: an injured soldier can literally be moved from the field of battle to a U.S. military hospital in Germany in less than 12 hours.
This is our news media, and this is how they think. If it's a success, if it works, if it demonstrates competence and duty, it doesn't have a "news hook".
If it's a disaster, a death, a bomb, a mistake, that is what will get their undivided attention.