A never-ending spin cycle
"Churnalism" is an absolutely perfect word for it. Not only does it help lazy writers produce content, but it gives them an excuse to throw in all their usual obsessions, as in the fusion reactor non-story, which became an excuse to trot out a pile of climate-change hysteria. The article could have been half as long and given a title like "Checking in with the Iter project: Thirty years to go for results, but the dream remains alive." (The title you suggested over at your blog was even more honest.)
Look at the vast sums of taxpayer money poured into absurd wind and solar projects that were, under the most optimistic but realistic projects, still decades of development away from true economic viability. I doubt wind will ever be anything but an expensive hobby for ideologues to blow other peoples' money on, and a moralistic way for crony socialists to get their hands into our wallets, but maybe another 20 years of development could produce solar panels that really work. But instead, they were pumped full of taxpayer subsidies by politicians and corporate parasites determined to pretend this green-energy junk is actually competitive with the energy resources that do work, including some exciting recent developments like fracking.
Nuclear fusion would be terrific, and I'm all in favor of developing it, but what logical purpose is served by long article that waits until the very last paragraph to tell you that it's still thirty years away from producing energy, and forty years away from selling it? And if anyone tries building a fusion reactor in the U.S., aren't they going to run afoul of the same anti-nuclear green radicals who fervently oppose fission reactors?