The problem isn't classification, as much as undoing the effect of a generation of academic and pop-sci publishing, which popularized the term "junk DNA" - and groups that perpetuate this term today, e.g. creationist/anti-evolution groups that use it to argue biologists are full of hubris (and thus wrong about evolution), and inadvertently keep the term itself alive.
Some journalists and pop-science writers are creationists themselves; the whole debate is still self-sustaining feedback loop, and one of its side effects is that the term "junk DNA" remains in use.
