If ever there is a press release that contains the debatable phrasing, then it's lazy journalism. Journalists love to copy and paste other people's writing. When scientists say, "We saw a planet through a telescope that we could never visit in our lifetime but it looks like there's water on it", that doesn't even make the newspapers at all. When the same thing happens and the scientists say, "We've found a magical faraway world that would make an ideal Garden of Eden for alien lifeforms", then all the news outlets will be full of OMG WOW IT'S E.T. NARNIA!!!11!!1! Every time. Nobody ever learns.

And that's really more down to the other issue, rather than lazy journalism: you have to make headlines exciting or nobody will read them. I haven't seen this news story anywhere, and I couldn't even sneak past the Guardian paywall so I still haven't read the story you posted. But I clicked the link because it was exciting. If you had posted some scandalised outrage that a woman lost her job for whistleblowing, I wouldn't care and I certainly wouldn't be bothering to reply to your post about it. So in that case, it's not about lazy journalism at all, but rather, the algorithm. And the algorithm is based on human nature. So you won't get round this, I'm afraid.

>or something more sinister?
I doubt it, but like I say, I haven't read it. It'll only be sinister if you can find a sinister force posting a press release that was unquestioningly repeated by The Guardian.