With respect, "points to this" is a little misleading. The original qz article had an interesting video (with reaction of winning the Nobel prize) of the laurete which the cell.com interview misses.
I missed the video, and it was sort of a borderline call to begin with since the older article lacks the current context. So maybe I would have left it had I seen that. On the other hand, IIRC what they did with the text was flat-out blogspam, i.e. cribbed completely from the other source, and it kinda galls me to reward that.
