Recently there was a huge amount of news coverage on the international Encode research project results, which showed that "junk DNA" has a large and previously unknown role in disease. Here's a link to the New York Times' coverage of the story:
There are 574 comments on this NYT article alone; clearly, a huge amount of public interest was generated by this story. A brief scan reveals that many of the commenters focus on the apparent arrogance of scientists in labeling a segment of the genome 'junk DNA'. Further exploration led me to the link below, in which a biological anthropologist explains the origin of the term 'junk DNA', usefully clarifying that scientists are not quite so arrogant as the public may like to believe.