Sarzoky is the New French Elect
The Washington Post
Sarzoky Winss, Vows to Restore Pride in France
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/06/AR2007050600216.html
The New York Times
Sarzoky, Elected in France, Vows Break From the Past
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/world/europe/07france.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
The New York Times and The Washington Post both covered the story of the competitive French Presidential debate between Nicholas Sarzoky and Ségoléne Royal. Both of these articles announced the winner in the beginning of the article, spoke of how close Royal was to becoming the first female President of France, the current state of the nation in terms of the recent violent protests in the French suburbs and the mistakes that Royal made in her campaign.
The New York Times article in my opinion was more successful in its portrayal of the event. This is because the whole article had more of a story-like feel to it, explaining the details of the candidates and some of the gossipy details that are prevalent and relevant in illustrating these events. Details such as the fact that Royal never mentioned Sarzoky’s name once in her concession speech or the fact that Sarzoky’s wife Cecilia was “noticeably absent� throughout most of the campaign and that she wasn’t present most of the day of the election. Further, the Times article gave more detailed accounts of the exact numbers of the ballots, and a play-by-play of when events happened. Such as, when the 98% of the votes had been counted, Royal gave her concession speech, and how by midnight, violent protests had ensued. The Times also sidestepped some potentially confusing jargon by listing necessary French locations in one list and referring to others as little as possible. However, the Times article failed to include details that the Washington Post included that linked relevant United States issues, like the President’s call to congratulate the new President who had just criticized the United States on global warming, and had said that they would remain friends, but even friends can think differently.
The Washington Post article, on the other hand, gave more of a black-and-white account of the events, with a more informative, yet generalized, lead. The Post article becomes confusing when it refers to the chaotic protest events and the places where things that occurred out of order. If it had told the story of the election night more chronologically, it could have avoided the reader’s confusion of pronouncing unknown French places with the simultaneous task of putting a picture together of the evening in deciphering when and why different events occurred. Although the article is heavy in basic information, it fails to use important details that the Times article includes, like when Sarzoky assures the past suburban rioters that were against his campaign and whom he once referred to as “scum� that he will represent all French people.
In all, the details of both articles were needed to create a better story in that they both leave out important details as they pertain to French and American future policy. However, the Times article was more successful in creating a comprehensive, engaging article.