Ellen Ruppel Shell (2016) says that as a modern science journalist, it is one of your main tasks to transcend the mere explication of science; instead, you must add value to it … So, if you have to add value, how do you do that? I will start with a deliberation of what adding value is not: adapting press releases and republishing them, extracting the quotes and re-using them and packaging this as a journalistic article. There is nothing substantially wrong with that, but merely spreading the word strongly overlaps with public information officers’ (PIOs) primary task: advertising science. Instead, what journalism must do is critically question what people would like you to take at face value.
Angler, Martin W. Science Journalism: An Introduction. London: Routledge, 2017.
Angler is citing a phone conversation with Ruppel Shell, who would know.
As a newbie aspiring to science journalism, the difference between reporting the science news versus reporting on the science is something I wrestle with. I think there are important stories in both realms, stories that need telling.