With the newspapers' recent move to online reporting, traditional norms and practices of news reporting have changed to accommodate the new realities of online news writing. In particular, online news is much more fluid and prone to change in content than the traditional hard-copy newspapers--online newspaper articles often change over the course of the following days or even weeks as they respond to criticisms and new information becoming available. This poses a problem for social scientists who analyse newspaper coverage of science, health and risk topics, because it is no longer clear who has read and written what version, and what impact they potentially had on the national debates on these topics. In this note I want to briefly flag up this problem through two recent examples of U.K. national science stories and discuss the potential implications for PUS media research.