Here's another good description of why the paper is a stinker:
Arsenic-associated bacteria (NASA's claims)
But yes, the reporters were parroting the claim that the DNA had arsenate, falling down on the job. Now, I certainly don't expect reporters to be able to analyze a technically complex paper such as what was given, but I do expect them to consider the possibility that maybe, perhaps, somebody who does have the ability to analyze such things take a look and see what's going on.
Journalism has been reduced to stenography. And bad stenography at that, as reporters will make shit up in order to sell the story.
Rrhain
Thank you for your submission to
Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.