That's one of the more obvious counterexamples. Being a journalists can also play a significant role when judges have to balance different rights: "Trespassing", for example, is obviously not as absolute as you make it out to be. If your life is in danger you can pretty much trespass as much as you want without any legal risk. "Informing the public" is a slightly weaker justification than survival, but it is a generally recognised public good and will be considered, especially in victimless crimes such as trespassing.
Law isn't an algorithm, or at least not a trivial one. It needs to capture the full breath of human life, with its limitless supply of nuance.
Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is more relevant.
I was more concerned about the case of Antoine Trepanier, who was arrested for harassment for doing normal journalism. However it appears that the charges have now been dropped.
Edit: I know this happened in Canada and the 1stA is not directly relevant to this case but my point is the same. There is not press freedom to trespass in Canada. There is a reason the other reporters stayed behind.