Physics & Chem - Journals Vs Media

Below is what I use for Chemistry re accuracy of scientific data presented in mass-media vs scientific - the general idea is the same for Physics - peer reviewed journal articles focus on factual statements, supported by evidence, reporting of error and uncertainty, all sources referenced, Mass media articles usually have a more speculative, sensationalist? approach with little referencing.

For Physics:
Just browse (I don't expect you to read) the following articles (here) and note the differences between the scientific journal articles (these are preprint versions not the final published article on (1) the 'faster-than-light-neutrinos' (2) the paper that suggests that neutrinos are not 'faster-than-light') and the mass media article.

From Chem:
12.4f - Check out the following files. This one is a peer-reviewed journal article. You do not need to read the whole article but note how all statements are supported by evidence, each claim is annotated with a reference (so the reader can check the accuracy of the information and do further research). Note the impartial/factual style of writing and information presented.
Then read this article from a newspaper on a similar topic. Note the style of writing, the lack of references, sensationalist approach. Also note the use of mixed units (ppm and mg/kg). This should always ring alarm bells. They state that the Australian standard for lead is 250mg/kg. They then make a fuss that the Dior lipstick has 0.21ppm lead. Perhaps you should convert 250mg/kg to ppm. Is there need for worry? Why do you think the journalist conveniently decided to change units in the article? For this skill what can you conclude about the accuracy of scientific data presented in mass-media vs scientific journals?