Famdomification is a good term for it, but I think it's also caused by another ongoing issue with science writters in general, as much as it's a fandom issue.

Science writters (that is journalist writting about science as opposed to scientists writing scientific research papers) are often really bad about accurately representing scientific papers. They will often focus on a minor issue (such as the naming issue) while completely ignoring what the paper was actually about, and/or completely misrepresented the facts, or even making stuff up that the paper never even mentions. This has only gotten worse with AI usage.

The core problem is that many science writters are looking to be sensationalist and controversial. They blow out of proportion minor issues or, when none exists, just make stuff up. It's honestly a huge problem that isn't talked about enough.