Press freedom and the right to know

has taken up the entire front page today.
I will be writing a letter? Possibly. I suspect that, if I do, it will be read - and discarded.
I believe press freedom is important but it comes with responsibilities. Those responsibilities are immense.
It comes with the responsibility first of all to accurately inform. It comes with the responsibility to be fair, to  be honest, to do nothing to harm, to protect, and to assist.
Those of you who know me and know my job will know that I sometimes get information from other sources. I know far more than I want to know about some situations. I also know I have to keep my mouth shut. People's lives could be endangered if I didn't. It is as simple as that.  At the same time it isn't simple at all and that worries me.  
I watch almost no television. I limit it to the first half hour of our international-multicultural news service. The reason I watch that much is to find out what other people are being told - what they are being told as opposed to what I am being told or have heard or is being reported elsewhere. 
I "rough read" or skim a lot of newspapers only reading in full those articles I know I am likely to need to know about. I also get information from people in the middle of situations and others who have direct information from them. 
What I am told in this way is often very different from what is being reported.
Before the internet, before the 24/7 news cycle, before outside broadcasting and the like people were differently informed. I won't say "better" informed but the way people were informed was different.  A President, Pope, Prime Minister or other politician  could probably have passed many people in the street and not been recognised. The horrors of war, natural disasters, sex offences and more were reported in quite different ways. There was still "sensationalist" type reporting of course - from papers like the gone and not-lamented "News of the World" or the local (grossly misnamed) "Truth". 
Now we know sensationalism sells. "Click bait" is rife. 
I don't think any of this is doing any good. It is making it impossible for people to sort out facts from fiction an even sheer fantasy. It doesn't give the media the right to inform us when national security is involved simply because they don't like what might potentially happen. It doesn't give the media the right to run a parallel trial by media especially when they are not in full possession of the facts. Perhaps we simply have too much "news" available to us now.
Press freedom does not mean free from responsibility. Unless that responsibility is taken seriously our right to know will be impeded.