Journalists are also in a position of power and trust, and as they are quite willing to dig in to the 'background' of others and public report it from that position of power, they should be willing to accept the same.
Neither party should enter in to any kind of smear campaign, or falsely report anything, or hopefully sensationalise anything, however there must be balance.
And part of that balance is that journalists should be willing to be held up to the same level of scrutiny as the people they report on.
From what I could tell there was no reported evidence that their private life was going to be investigated, just their background - and that IS entirely valid, in the
same way that it is valid for a journalist to investigate the background of those they report on. It is quite clear here that there are suspicions, quite possibly valid,
that certain people in the media are intentionally targeting a company - it is ENTIRELY valid for the company to put similar effort in to investigating those
journalists to see if there is an underlying reason for the targeting - of course hopefully they will find nothing.
It is rather precious for a journalists to cry foul about having their 'private lives' attacked when they are reporting comments that were made in a private context,
especially when the journalists in question have reported also on a number of details of the CEO in questions private life themselves.
All part of the poisonous angry world of distrust and low morals that is the public face of the US these days, I guess. Deal with it.