The two articles I decided to read were from cnn.com and usatoday.com. In the first article from CNN, "Three U.S. soldiers killed in Baghdad attacks", the article described an attack on the international zone, also known as the green zone. During this attack 3 men were killed while leaving 17 other soldiers wounded. The article then shifts and talks about a bus of college students that were abducted and later let go.
The second article from usatoday.com "3 U.S. soldiers killed near Baghdad", talked about a previous roadside bombing that killed 3 soldiers. The article then moves into a friendly fire air strike on allied Sunni fighters killing six guards and wounding two. Not much was said by American military men due to a lack of knowledge on what happened. Officers that were interviewed said that the Americans had talked to the Sunni soldiers a few hours before the bombing.
I saw a slight difference in the two articles in how much depth was written about the bombings. In the first article, the writer had written very briefly on the main subject and quickly moved to other subjects. In the second article, the same was done but even the second subject of the article was written more in depth. The recurring problem with the two articles was having very little written on the main subject while having about three or more topics that were briefly described. The main difference of the second article was that there was one topic that had more depth and better description than topics in the first article.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/04/06/iraq.main/index.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2008-03-22-iraq-saturday_N.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment