Why people don't get that progress IS being made in the field of AI

One of the things that often frustrates me in discussions about "AI" is that many people have unreasonable expectations of what AI should be. Take a look at this quote from an article about Intel's new 1.1 teraflop chip...

"Intel suggested one possible consumer use: a program that intelligently monitors a televised sporting event and automatically identifies and compiles key highlights like a slam dunk or a home run by a favorite player based on the spectator's preferences.
Other uses could be artificial intelligence, realistic 3-D computer modeling and real-time speech recognition."

So, the article talks about the chip allowing the capability for a home entertainment system to intelligently compile key highlights from sporting events. Then, in the next sentence, the article states that "other uses could be artificial intelligence". Excuse me, how is the ability for a computer to intelligently compile key highlights from a sporting event not "artificial intelligence"? Granted, the ability to intelligently compile highlights from a sporting game is not a generalized human-level intelligence but it certainly is a rather narrow form of artificial intelligence.
It seems that many people have this flawed perception that no progress is being made in "AI" because they have this expectation that "AI" has to mean a human-level intelligence. This is like saying that no progress has been made in space travel because humans have not yet traveled to another solar system.