I think the shot is a little dark. From your description, it sounds more like you were trying to set up a portrait than a journalism shot. The way I see it, the event captured is as, if not more, important than the people. Take a look at some of the more moving shots. The Kent massacre shot, the execution of the Viet Cong officer, Napalm girl, and the Sudanese girl with the vulture. Do you know their names, or who they were? Probably not. Do you know the image and the event it represents? That's a whole lot more likely. The point is this - when you look at those shots, what is the first question that comes to mind?
Another point of particular importance is this:
Bad, bad, and bad. Things like overall color, density, and sharpness corrections to a point are usually alright. But the key word here is 'corrections'. You want to represent exactly what you saw, but taking any creative control and changing the scene is unethical. Even something as simple as removing a fence post is a huge no-no. Take a look at some other infamous breaches in ethics, including the Kent massacre shot,
here.
I think the best way to get some good journalism shots would be to follow him around during a day of work, stay out of his way, and shoot his every day work-flow. Don't concentrate too much on the artistic aspect of the shot. Even this, however, is more of a documentary photograph in my mind than a journalism shot. You need a relevant story to tell to give a journalism shot some context.
I'm not a journalist though, so this is all opinion and some schooling. No direct experience yet. I know, however, there are others here that have had more direct involvement with journalism, and hope they can correct any errors I have made or improve on anything I may have missed.