Isn't this old news? I remember the first time I heard about the speed of light not being constant thinking that it meant we had to reevaluate our approximations of where we are relative to other stars.
Here are a few related articles from the past:
ScienceDaily 1999
USATODAY 2001
NewScientist 2004
Wired 2007
I love this quote, though:
"I suspect that the bulk of the scientific community will not take this as a definitive result unless it can be reproduced by at least one and preferably several experiments," says V. Alan Kostelecky, a theorist at Indiana University, Bloomington. He adds, however, "I'd be delighted if it were true."
Replication of the experiment to verify the results is an important step in the scientific method. Skipping that and going straight to the media with your results is reminiscent of Fleischmann and Pon's cold fusion claims from 1989 and more recently Hwang Woo-suk's stem cell claims from 2004-2005.