It is a critique, not a summary. If you think it stops being one, point out where.

I don’t take articles at face value, especially when it comes to science reporting. Journalists often overstate or oversimplify studies, so I read the actual paper. I highlighted what it really says, what it doesn’t say, and what the article adds that isn’t in the study at all.

If an article misrepresents a paper’s core ideas, why shouldn’t that be called out? Misreporting confuses readers and undermines the authors’ work by failing to represent it accurately.