The more clicks, the more money, because the clicks put eyes on the site's advertisements.
The headline "suggests" that BBC (an independent/public service media arm funded by the UK government) came up with this pronouncement and reported it as news that they developed. It's a different thing altogether if they are reporting on a study making the claim, regardless of the validity of the source.
Using NASA as an analogy doesn't quite work. NASA isn't the BBC and we don't watch the nightly news brought to us by NASA, nor does NASA comment on the governmental management tendencies of foreign nations. One is a government space agency, the other is a British news outlet. If PBS/NPR developed a story telling the UK about themselves, they'd throw a little shade, too--if they simply reported on a study, why, that's a different thing altogether.
As far as the study goes, it's an interesting effort, and they could have reported on it without even mentioning "BBC" at all. MSNBC is a good enough source, I should think.
Their coverage isn't bad at all. They stick with the conclusion, blame both parties, and suggest a few fixes at your link.
Here's some more information on the study itself, also courtesy of MSNBC (in effect the same source, if not the same program, as your link): http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-us-no-longer-democracy
The study looked at nearly 1,800 policy issues over a 20-year period between 1982 and 2002. According to their data, when the rich support a policy, it has a 45% chance of becoming law. And when they oppose it, it has only an 18% chance of being enacted.
“In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule – at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it,” the study said.
Other studies have shown that income inequality has grown in recent years. An economist at the University of California-Berkeley estimated that between 2009 and 2012, the richest 1% of Americans held 95% of all income growth.
I'm delighted that this kind of conversation is finally happening--I just don't need it suggested that "BBC" is telling us to eat our peas (don't take that personally; that's not how I intended it). The study itself was conducted right here in USA.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Also not sure what you mean by "click bait"? I am always more attracted to headlines talking about studies, knowing they have science behind them, not just opinion. 
