Many of the situations Fry is complaining about were actually people doing the exact same thing. e.g. just not showing up to a debate or lecture by a person that they don't want to engage with. When a random student decides not to attend a debate with a national celebrity it's labeled as "no platforming" (in the words of Peter Tatchell) and condemned in the national media. When Fry chooses not to engage with people (which he is perfectly free to do) his critics have no such platform to publicly moan about him.

So there very much seems to be a double standard here. If you are an older feminist or gay rights campaigner or celebrity you can take advantage of a platform in the national newspapers to complain about the activities of students. If you are a student all you can do is not attend, but even doing that can get your name dragged through the mud in newspapers because people like Julie Bindel, Germain Greer and Peter Tatchell are given a huge platform by newspapers.

Are you mis-attributing the use of 'no platforming; to Peter Tatchell? I don't believe he actually said that, and it was rather a media invention. Generally it's been quite clear that this was not an official policy, so it can't really count as no-platforming.

(It may be unrelated, but I'd point out that refusing to share a stage with one of the world's foremost gay rights activists is a preposterous decision in this case, and I'm glad it was roundly ridiculed. Even if it's not 'no-platforming' as such, it's still a bad position to take, and stinks of the general idea that debate is too much work.)