Now on the last note you said is "what ppl expect".
Now I want to be clear I fully respect you & your publication & truthfully any others.
Media's responsibility imho is to report & educate the masses (where possible). Often though we side with public trends/presumptions according to perceived norm.
While rediculous imho if i put 4 1080p @ 16:9 monitors together....
1980/1080 x 4 = 7680/1080 at 64:9 aspect. Under the accepted 7.6k being 8k we have 1080p at 64:9.
In the above we'd both agree with that its 8k with a ridiculous aspect ratio. But would not compare properly with 8k tv.
However add a pic as @Cdaked brought up we can illustrate the truth.
Create an 8k(7.6k) 16:9 rectangle & place the 8k at 32:9 inside it.
Consumers will see it matches the Width spec but at half height.
"In the above pic you can see while it is not 8k as in TV. It is 8k by width with half the height of 16:9, this is due to the headset using twice the width giving it the same height as 4k tv but with the width of an 8k tv. The PiMax uses an aspect ratio of 32:9.
With links to aspect ratio & explaining that an 8k at 32:9 has half the pixel count of 16:9.
I'm sure you could write the draft up cleaner & clearer but now your educating the consumer instead of promoting a double misnomer due to consumers presumptions of what 8k is & isn't.
With more 21:9 screens being made & closer or the same as cinema it is potenially likely that we may see the shape of tv change again from 16:9 to 21:9.