And most importantly, major publications are specifically not framing this as a discovery, but as a documentation.

That's kind of self-referential gaslighting. How can you tell if society is progressing in awareness (which it is) if every time you see "scientist" you think "white man" and justify it as assuming they were racist enough to put that? (Not you, the person we are talking about.)

That idea that "scientists discover x" being a substitute is correct, but is well-known today because it is a historical trend that was described by modern academics. Not a rampant current issue (despite single examples one might be able to find).

All I'm saying is that progress starts with the institution and the reader and should meet somewhere in the middle. The reader assuming this is what articles mean downright perpetuates the problem.

Besides, afaik, they only decided it's a new species after an extensive genetic test, so the fact that locals called it something doesn't mean that even locals knew it was different from similar cats. It feels more like naming a new cat species 'cat' in local language