Follow up story analysis
I blogged last week on a Star Tribune story that two teens had been arrested in conjunction with a shooting of a DHL delivery driver. A follow up story was done a few days later, providing much more information about the incident.
Both leads say much of the necessary information, but the follow up story gives a bit of an answer to the question "why". It says that two teens where charged with the shooting, and had decided to rob him on their way home from school. The first lead says only that two teens, 15 and 17, had been arrested.
The follow up story also gives the names of the two boys, actually 16 and 17, and their charges. Pieces of the two boys; stories are also found within the story. This information was obviously unavailable when the initial story was written. More information on the condition of the driver is also mentioned.
The first story also had a focus of all juvenile crime rates in the area and how they seem to be on the rise. Only information about the specific incident was found in the follow up, which is probably because more information was available and able to be used at the time of the second story.
Both stories organize the news in ways that flow well with a reader, but I thought the first one waited too long to tell the story. It gave facts and talked about juvenile crime before it told the reader what happened.