"[S]ome student journalist... said they found themselves struggling to meet two dueling goals: responding to the changing expectations of the students they cover, particularly from those on the political left, while upholding widely accepted standards of journalism...."

"'Everybody’s trying to figure out a solution and still be good journalists along the way,' said Olivia Olander, a sophomore video journalist at Northwestern who covered the protest over the Sessions speech. At a time when some say heightened sensitivities have become the norm on American campuses, it is not uncommon for college newspaper editors to be confronted by students who are upset at being photographed in a public place without being asked for their permission; who view receiving a text message or phone call from a reporter as an invasion of their privacy; and who expect journalists to help assuage their concerns that graphic images in a newspaper could cause trauma to readers....  'There was definitely a lot of panic,' [said the student who deleted his photograph of a protester.] 'There was me being worried that I’m hurting people with my coverage.'... [The dean of the journalism school wrote,] 'I have also offered that it is naïve, not to mention wrongheaded, to declare, as many of our student activists have, that The Daily staff and other student journalists had somehow violated the personal space of the protesters by reporting on the proceedings, which were conducted in the open and were designed, ostensibly, to garner attention,' he said."

From "News or ‘Trauma Porn’? Student Journalists Face Blowback on Campus" (NYT).

I agree with the dean, and I've followed that idea about publishing photographs of people who don't give their consent. I say they've chosen to make a spectacle of themselves and thereby given up the entitlement to say don't look at me or only look at me the way I want to be seen.

But that's just how I talk. If I were dean of a journalism school I might say their actions "designed, ostensibly, to garner attention." Garner! That word! But he used it in public, he chose it, ostensibly to garner admiration, so it's just fine for me to make fun of it.

As for those students, well, I guess they learned something. And don't tell me that seasoned journalists aren't pulling their punches when they get close to people they don't want to hurt. What is the example these students see? It's not be tough and neutral and show us what really happened.