Abstracts are supposed to be technical
One aspect I think you missed in determining what gets coverage – the abstract. If the abstract is too technical or describes results that a journalist cannot understand, they will not read the details. Only if the abstract has something stated in a way that the non-technical reader can understand and sees as newsworthy, will they pursue it further.
Absolutely. Positively. Wrong.
That is not what an abstract is for. Although I’ve complained about some press releases in the past (e.g., here and here), I read them essentially everyday and am more often than not satisfied with the information they provide. Press releases or other media releases are written without jargon and non-technical language — they are designed specifically for those without specific training (I put journalists in that category).
If scientists were to write abstracts like media releases, they would become useless to those in the field that want to know what the paper is about. Not the general topic of the paper … but what it is really about.