For me the issue is rush to judgement.
Two things are interconnected. The first is moral panic or hystieria. The second is a process that leaps over or skips the step of careful fact finding.
in a democracy noone should be able to write in colclusory statements. Whenever anyone says " the graduate witnessed a rape" the author has a duty to cite the basis for that statement. So for example what exaactly did he or she see. What exactly did he or she hear.
Did the graduate assistant see "A rape" or did he hear the sound of towels slapping. When the other graduate assistant saw him lying on top of a boy were they nude ? What did he actually see. That needs to be cited in detail, names of the witnesses should be named.
Each of these articles is like a trial. And each of these trials should be conducted fairly. The reader has aright to know what allegations are substantiated clearly, which ones are vague or unsubstantiated.
No doubt everyone is being tried in the media. Nothing to be done about that. But the trials should be conducted fairly.