You can't just go restricting what the press can say like that regardless of how much we dislike what they are saying.
I think you can, because in the UK, in some well defined (and somewhat common situations), essentially exactly that already happens.
Examples are things like terrorist arrests, are only reported as the names of the individuals, location and maybe very brief one line explanation of why. Right up until the end of their trial.
E.g. "XYZ and XYZ2 arrested in Manchester on suspicion of preparing for terrorism. A quantity of chemicals used in bomb making were also removed by police".
Things like people under a certain age (16 or 18), are kept secret from the press (the details of the crimes and victims are published). Even their names are withheld, even after they are sentenced and imprisoned. The idea is to stop them getting "marked" as criminals while still a child. Potentially harming the Child for the rest of their life.
Hopefully they are young enough (too old = less likely to learn from experience) and will learn to never do it again.
Let me help you because you and others seem to be stuck on stupid.
Anytime you hear about BLM, just remember, their slogan is really, black lives matter too.
I did not realize about the "
too" bit.
That is better, but I still have my reservations. But that does gain more sympathy from me.
Maybe it's because BLM = "Black Lives Matter", so the "too" bit gets a bit forgotten.