Mass shootings now occur so often in the United States that there’s a certain rhythm to how Americans learn about them: the initial reports of gunfire on social media, the cell-phone footage of people running in terror, the unconfirmed casualties from “law enforcement sources.” Elected officials make statements that usually outrage more people than they console. Speculation gives way to fact: Police confirm the death toll, allowing Americans to figure out just how much anger to feel before they move on.

As this pattern became a normal feature of American life over the past two decades, a grassroots campaign began to challenge how news outlets covered the perpetrators themselves. Researchers, gun-control activists, and often ordinary citizens urged journalists and public officials to avoid discussing the gunman or any manifesto he may have written. They instead called for coverage to focus on the victims and their stories over whatever narrative the shooter may have wanted.

This movement deserves credit for pushing U.S. news outlets toward less sensationalist coverage of mass shootings. At the same time, this strategy has its limits. It works best when dealing with gunmen who have no broader agenda other than shooting as many people as they can. When used on those who commit mass murder for political or ideological reasons, however, it risks obscuring the causes that led to the killings in the first place. That may make it harder to prevent similar massacres in the future.

It began with the best possible intentions. The No Notoriety campaign began in 2012 with Tom and Caren Teves, whose son Alex died in the shooting that year at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. They started the campaign after seeing national coverage that focused on gunman James Holmes—his sinister visage, how he killed twelve people so quickly, and other lurid aspects of his story. Far less attention was paid to the victims, their suffering, or even their heroism. Alex Teves, for example, died while shielding his girlfriend’s body with his own.

Many of No Notoriety’s recommendations are reasonable, such as naming a perpetrator “once per piece as a reference point, never in the headlines and no photo above the fold,” and to “elevate the names and likenesses of all victims killed and/or injured to send the message [that] their lives are more important than the killer’s actions.” The group urges journalists to balance the public’s need to know with the risk of potential harm. Indeed, journalists often make similar balancing judgments when covering other sensitive matters, like child sexual assault.