The Washington Post and the New York Times both covered Najibullah Zazi's guilty plea.
The Post chose not to have any photos accompany their article, while the Times had two, one of Zazi and one of his lawyer.
Both news organizations had videos. The Post's video was originally aired by CBS News. The Times' video came from Reuters.
Both videos discussed Zazi's plea and used footage from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's press conference and almost the exact same quote toward the beginning of their videos.
The Times' video comes back to Holder's press conference later in the video and uses more quotes from him. The video would have been better if they had paraphrased more of his speech.
The information in both videos is generally the same although laid out in different orders.
The Post's video does discuss craters in Colorado created by bombs detonated by Zazi and associates and gives more background information into the story than the Times' video.
Overall, the Post's video is better edited and more interesting.
Both articles discuss the plea.
The Times explain the charges, while the Post do not.
Both articles make connections between the attempt and the 9/11 attacks, saying it would have been the worst attack on U.S. soil since if it had happened.
The Times chooses to put the bulk of the information about the trial higher in the article, while the Post places it lower.
The Post talks about the Obama administration and gets into the political applications of the story, while the Times does not.
The Post's article is much longer.
Both articles put the background information of the story towards the bottom of the article.
The Post's article ends with testimony from Bruce Hoffman, a counterterrorism analyst from Georgetown University, while the Times article ends with quotes from Holder.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment