Re: Yet again:
Press: "Scientist proves X is possible!"
That's because (with some notable outliers), journalists are very rarely subject experts in the topics that they cover (for example: Rory Cellan-Jones. He knows less about IT than my wife does and she's a proud Luddite. Apparently, one doesn't have an IT-literate husband and have to do IT oneself. The words "dog" and "bark" were mentioned..)
Secondly, the news organisations exist to sell papers/pageviews and sensationalising stuff does that. And most people won't have the brains, persistence or time to actually read and digest the articale because there's
Oh look! Pictures of kittens! Cute!
..what was I saying? Oh never mind. Apparently, somewhere someone mildly famous for being famous is doing something slightly scandalous/tittillating/embarassing and I must watch it immediately because it totally will make me uncool if I don't mention it first at work..
Bah. A pox on it all. I think I'm getting old.
 Apart from a carefully-curated list of news websites of course. Selected with no selection bias at all. After all, I have interests, you have biases and they are rigidly opposed to the Truth.