the issue is rather the quality of the articles and what we as humans in general prefer to read. we'd rather read about an extreme (this is the greatest, this is the worst) or a conflict (person a says the opposite to person b). it's basically just a symptom of decaying journalistic standards. incidentally it's often also cheaper to produce such content.

there is probably an academic consensus that goes one way or the other, but our journalism has decayed enough that they don't even bother researching this.