> I can't help thinking that most journalists probably study social science etc. at undergrad level, leaving them ill equipped for gritty technical investigation
Social sciences are empirical sciences where knowledge of statistical controls and other tools needed to deal with the difficulty of laboratory research in the area of study are necessary as well as all those things necessary in any empirical science, so they don't have that effect.
OTOH, most journalists probably study journalism or other arts, not any kind of science, at the undergraduate level.
I take your point and my choice of words could have been better, though I'd note that valid methodologies in social science are far from limited to quantitative, which is what you seem to be suggesting, and plenty of students can get through a social science degree relying almost entirely on qualitative methodology.
Social sciences are empirical sciences where knowledge of statistical controls and other tools needed to deal with the difficulty of laboratory research in the area of study are necessary as well as all those things necessary in any empirical science, so they don't have that effect.
OTOH, most journalists probably study journalism or other arts, not any kind of science, at the undergraduate level.