She was _on_stage_ with CNet and an audience at a press conference/interview. There's no reasonable grounds for her to expect any sort of privacy in this context.
True, but the perpetrators violated her reasonable expectation not to be attacked by flying penises in that context. I think this case is just silly, but the issue does come up with regard to more serious crimes. If a criminal films the rape of his victims, should newscasts be allowed to show it? Should pornographers be allowed to compile DVDs of such videos and sell them? If US soldiers strip and humiliate Iraqi detainees and take pictures/videos, should those be disseminated? Should they be edited to hide the genitals or maybe the faces?
I'm not arguing either way here, just noting similar (but obviously much more extreme) examples.
The only perfect science is hind-sight.