One difference is that these people are being accused by civil authorities --not some "rando" who moonlights as cyberpolice. He's not acting in an official capacity and doesn't have the imprimatur of the state.
I didn’t look closely but the first example I think is a non-state accusation. But interesting line to attempt to draw.
I look at the media as a counter to the power of the state. So I worry about an arrangement where media can’t name people without state approval. But perhaps my view is archaic?
I get what you're saying but the state here is often the official record for things. These kinds of government records are open and searchable in most cases. And to some extent they answer to the governed. You can get a new DA, mayor, etc. You can't fire an internet sleuth.
