A recent article on Knight Science Journalism Tracker warned against taking sites like Science Daily as “news” services, since they really just echo institution press releases. However, in some cases it’s worse than just repetition.
Here’s an example.
From the University of Utah:
Obviously, a more accurate headline would have been “Adaptations to high elevations have evolved in Tibetan populations”, but the existing title isn’t so bad. However, look how e!Science News chose to reword it:
Does e!Science News have a problem with the word “evolution”? Or, in an effort to change the story ever so slightly to seem original, did they think “evolution” and “development” could be used interchangeably? What gives?