Well, journalism is a job like any other and at least in Europe every one has the right to strike. In Italy is quite common, and it can result in newspapers not being printed at all, news broadcasts not being broadcasted or being reduced to a 5 minutes thing, and websites not being updated.
It's hard to come up a specific source for it, and even more if you want it in English, so just a few random examples:
And it's plenty of those every year. As I said strike is a normal action allowed to every kind of worker, so there is no reason a journalist can't do it. In some cases it's a complete strike for the entire category, so there is no newspaper printed at all in the entire country, in some others is just one specific news firm (like the last two I posted)
To be noted anyway that there can be -and there are- many different reasons for a strike, and having Italy a strong recent history of unionism and category contracts -that is, a national template contract for a certain category of workers- most of the strikes are about the journalists disagreeing on their contracts, either the national category one or the one implemented by their editor.
As the question seems to focus mostly on protests against censorship, anyway, the one happened in July 2010, on the 9th, is -sort of about- that:
It's difficult to relay the exact facts, because in Italy partisanship is the cornerstone of society and it's hard to really know what is going on, but in short in July 2010 Italian journalists have protested against the introduction of a law that allow for a finer control of what can be published or not, mostly in relationship to secreted stuff during processes.
For example, let's say there is an important process related to mafia, and some people are under protection and there are some documents that must be kept secret, and an important boss phone calls are been intercepted but he must not know about it. The core of the protest of July is that journalists want to be able to bribe some official and then publish the name of the people under protection, the important documents and the transcripts of the interceptions, and this having no legal consequence on them, under the reasoning of "free press" and "the people have the right to know".