Why didn't media channels blur rape victim's face?

The Indian Penal Code has a section about disclosure of identity of the victim.

From indiakanoon.org,

[228A. Disclosure of identity of the victim of certain offences etc.—

(1) Whoever prints or publishes the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C or section 376D is alleged or found to have been committed (hereafter in this section referred to as the victim) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.

There are different views about disclosure of victim's identity on whether or not to make public. There are some rape victims in India who have disclosed their identity because they feel rapists should cover their faces not the victims. More about section 228A.

It's upto the victim whether or not to make their identity public. The media or organisation cannot go against the will of the victim. This is the summary.

From the movie perspective, it is Sameera who was ready to make the news public. She wanted to take advantage of the incident and then gain sympathy. By doing this, her intention is to escape from Ashok's murder case. The local media also sympathize with her.

It is revealed in the climax that she actually played the rape victim card and tried to gain sympathy.

Many movies do not follow exact rules and ethics followed by real life media organisations. Movies take liberty.

In the movie Temper which is remade in Tamil and Hindi as Ayogya and Simmba, they not only share victim's name and photo but they even telecast what happened to the victim. It's for creating drama, increasing emotion in the audience.