That was one strike against them in their efforts to gain industry acceptance. The second strike was in the narrow subject matter of scholarly communication. The most talented academic researchers work on tiny pieces of large puzzles. If enough pieces are found for a puzzle, an understandable pattern will emerge and illuminate a vast area of knowledge that both academics and practitioners can appreciate. But the individual reports on the single pieces are usually interesting only to other researchers working on the same puzzle.
Journalists are accustomed to reading stories.
A story has a problem, a conflict, and resolution. It ends with a nice sense of closure. Academic research reports end with uncertainty and a plea for further research. An academic article is not fun to read unless you have been following the work on the same problem over a period of time. Strike three is the use of technical jargon.