I would like a least a little appeal to competence. The same annoys me when someone in particular with a BA in government and no scientific education tries to lecture us on the scientific evidence for climate change.
Most of the public cannot properly discuss scientific evidence because most of the public doesn’t understand the rigorous statistics used in the sciences nor do they understand the details of the sciences and the scientific method. It is OK to discuss and chew the fat with friends and such, but when I want to hear the pros and cons from the media I expect to be greeted by someone who has extensively studied the topic.
NASA gives the media astronauts to help cover space launches. Controversies in astronomy are typically covered by interviewing astronomers. Business stories typically have people knowledgeable in business. Art stories have people knowledgeable in the arts. Is it too much to ask that the news about discoveries and controversies in evolution include interviews with scientists instead of crappy debates between the liberal side and the conservative side where neither of the talking heads knows what they are talking about?