&gt; That&#x27;s technically incorrect although unlikely to matter to layreader.<p>Details are important. Getting them wrong makes a journalist look sloppy and incompetent.<p>&gt; It&#x27;s argued explicitly in the complaint.<p>Is it? I withdraw this point if so. At a quick skim, the patent doesn&#x27;t seem to have anything to do with power efficiency, but if it&#x27;s in the complaint, I can&#x27;t fault BBC for mentioning it in the article.<p>&gt; What information do you think need to be included in an article pointed at the casual reader?<p>I dunno. Maybe this is the right level of detail for the casual reader. It seems extremely, uselessly broad to me though.