Neither you nor I need to order anyone what to read, how to read it and how or whether to redistribute it. I take from your words the criticism of sensationalism. But similarly to freedom, no one needs permission to express themselves sensationally; indeed, it has been a stylistic device that has enjoyed great popularity ever since the printing press came into existence (not my style, though). Whether used consciously or unconsciously.

The fact that one generally gets the impression that people do not deal very responsibly with the media and their news does not necessarily mean that they do what they say. For my part, I am careful not to take everything I read at face value. That responsibility is mine, I don't think I need to be protected from shocking headlines etc. reaching me. ...
I remember in this context the heated debate about the Charlie Hebdo thing in France. Is it okay to ban satire that crosses certain boundaries, should it be banned, etc.? Once you try to control that, you get into a control maelstrom of unimaginable proportions. The question I would ask you is: should the user here no longer publish such articles? Should others not support him? How difficult is it to give a clear answer to that?

Yes, crazy encounters happen everywhere. You can see from your bus experience where you are normal and someone else doesn't seem to be :)