Most often when journalists refuse to disclose sensitive information, it's either because it can jeopardize critical ongoing investigations and they are kindly asked to withhold by authorities, or because the information not only outs the crime of the perpetrator but also the potential victims.

In both cases journalists can chose to publish anyway, but have to ask themselves serious moral questions : Do I want to put an investigation at risk? Do I want to be the person who exposes the victims to public scrutiny when they're likely already not having a good time?

I haven't seen anyone talking about that second hypothesis in any thread about the situation and the silence around it and it kinda irks me.