After 1895, as it gradually became apparent across the entire width of the science and mathematics that Newtonian mechanics was perhaps not the metaphor for the way that Reality worked, individually and collectively scientists faced their biggest ever dilemma.
Up to 1895, the sort of science (Popular Science) that was taught in high schools and to undergraduates and was simplified-down whenever eminent scientists talked to the popular press, at least was the same as all scientists believed it was, whenever they wrote about it in peer-reviewed articles in the best regarded science journals.
(Best be aware that 'peer-reviewed' is a metaphor or a sort of shorthand for reliably-regarded science articles, because in fact, formal peer-review in today's sense of the term was actually quite rare until after 1945.
It was still 'peer-reviewed' before publishing but in a highly informal style - the peer might be the editor and his closest friend with some specialist knowledge in the particular area the paper dealt with.)
There was no moral divide between Published and Popular Science.
Unfortunately after 1895, this happy unity was torn apart and has never been re-sutured.
It was choice made made the scientists themselves.
They were just then (this is more than a hundred years ago, mind you) entertaining strong hopes they could do basic science full time and be both well paid (including tenure and pensions) and well respected for doing so.
Crucially, these would be jobs in other people's employ - they would be well paid well regarded employees - not self-employed entrepreneurs.
They were thus dependent highly on public good will.