Michael Crichton gave a name to the absence of such wondering:
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
It's all the editor. If the editor accepts stuff like this, then it happens. Sometimes you luck out and get a writer who really understands, usually you do not.
ArsTechnica seems to be getting it right, and the other day I heard NPR call up one of their editors as an expert, so the mainstream news is noticing something.
I think the real problem is, most consumers don't know what they're missing.
