From what I've seen, most reporters simply select the most inflammatory language they can muster to describe firearms held by bad guys. 'Assault weapons', 'sniper rifles', 'Saturday night specials', etc. They act as though none of this matters, and the details are unimportant. 'Course, if your goal is to demonize firearms, then I suppose that perspective makes sense ...
The best example I've ever seen was the snatch of Elian Gonzalez in Miami. The government thug in that infamous photo was wielding an H&K MP5. The story was by the AP. Now, whenever the AP can demonize a firearm, they are Johnny on the spot. But, in this story, how did they refer to the MP5 held by the agent? They called it a 'rifle'. Not an 'assault weapon'. Not an 'AR15'. Just a 'rifle'. The bias is so obvious.
Don't waste a slug on your TV ... at least not for this reason ...
Regards from AZ