This isn't that egregious. I mean, yes, you're technically correct, but it's easy to mentally translate "radioactivity in the contaminated soil..." to "the radi

This isn't that egregious. I mean, yes, you're technically correct, but it's easy to mentally translate "radioactivity in the contaminated soil..." to "the radioactivity in the contaminated soil is such that it would deliver 8,900 rad/hour to a worker standing in its vicinity" (or something along those lines). It's entirely understandable that the reporters didn't go through whatever awkward and pedantic phrasing they technically should have. And while Ci is technically the right measurement for "amount of radioactivity", that's not a measurement that's useful for general consumption. Giving the expected dose and dimensions of the contaminated soil is vastly more effective at communicating the severity of the contamination.