My point is that media owners and their pet editors don't want competent science journalists, they want compliant stenographers who will go to their assigned ex

My point is that media owners and their pet editors don't want competent science journalists, they want compliant stenographers who will go to their assigned experts and repeat what they say. They don't want stories that will encourage their readers to engage in critical thinking. There are plenty of people who could do competent science (and other) journalism if that was the standard they were held to. Such work can still be found here and there, in specialty journals (Science and Nature news reports are often quite good), but it's increasingly rare in corporate media for the above reasons.