In the Minnesota Senate race Norm Coleman beat Al Franken by only seven-thousandths of a percent, which requires a recount by hand. Also, Al Franken wants the state to reconsider 461 rejected absentee ballots. (This hits even closer to home for me, because I've been worried the last couple weeks that I filled my absentee ballot out incorrectly.)
The New York Times article started the story with plenty of background information, for readers who didn't know about how close the race was, or which candidate was the incumbent. It referenced national figures like Sean Hannity, as well as a Minnesota reporter for the Star Tribune. The bottom of the page had links to other articles on the issue, but the most recent one was from February.
I thought the Star Tribune had a much more interesting presentation. Because the readers already know the issue, they started their article off with "The latest twist..." and skipped the background information. There were 237 reader comments, some graphics (see picture below) and links to nine other articles on the story, written in the last week.
While the New York times has a better design and readability, I'm glad I read the Star Tribune because of the extra information and reader comments. I think they have resources to actually do a better job reporting than the national news, when it's a story that happened in Minnesota.
How do stories in your hometown paper and the national news compare? What differences have you noticed in coverage of the same news, and which is usually more interesting?
image from StarTribune.com website
No comments:
Post a Comment