[moh_maya]

Perhaps because the peer-reviewed paper was published only recently (23rd Nov) - while not a perfect system (see the recent issues with the retraction of the super-conductivity paper by Nature), I think it not a bad thing that journalists are covering such reports once they have undergone the peer-review process - however flawed it may be, and not just based on the university or research group published press-release announcing the results before the peer-review process is complete.

[1] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abo5095

[jordanpg]

Also, while the final result can be simply stated in a headline, performing the analysis that rules out all known sources of error is very, very difficult and can take years to validate.