The reality is it's somebody who was integral to the operation and completion of the project, but is also being pushed into the limelight by people with an agenda. What could possibly be the incentive for doing it in such a contentious way, i.e. wording it in ways like "we owe the discovery to her", "developed the algorithm", etc., rather than saying "Dr. Katie Bouman was an invaluable part of creating an algorithm to develop the image of the blackhole"? Because media THRIVES on contention. They love this shit. One side doesn't think that the claim is ridiculous and thinks the other side is being sexist, and the other side thinks the claim is ridiculous (usually "it was a group, not just her") and thinks the other side is pushing an agenda. And it has us all talking about it and clicking on articles about it.

Honestly I just wish people would see past the bullshit and see the reality: she was an invaluable part of a project made up of many invaluable parts. Ambiguous wording is just being used to rile people up.