The story focuses on Obama's request for compromise between Democrats and Republicans in Congress so that an agreement can be made on the 2011 budget and to keep the government funded for the whole year.
The story contained more factual information than Obama's weekly address, because Obama's address had more generalized information, such as when he said the unemployment rate was going down.
The Wall Street Journal story gave specific numbers, saying that the unemployment rate decreased from 9.8% to 8.9%.
The reason why the WSJ story had more specific factual information was because Obama's address was too generalized because it was written in the form of a speech than just the facts.
The reader needs more information than Obama gave, as well as an opposing opinion, which the Wall Street Journal had. This is to give the story a greater sense of neutrality on Obama's issues.
The Wall Street Journal also found the most important information of Obama's address, such as his willingness to make more spending cuts, so that the reader gets a clearer view of what Obama was trying to get across.
The Wall Street Journal story didn't use too many quotes from the address either, because it made for a better story to paraphrase and use quotes from Obama sparingly for emphasis.
Overall, the Wall Street Journal story was able to get Obama's point across, give more important factual information and show the point of view of his opponents. This makes for a better story than if they simply reiterated what Obama said in his weekly address.