Date Set for North Korea Nuclear Disarmament Talks
An Associated Press article printed in the Star Tribune today has reported that international talks on dismantling North Korea's nuclear weapons programs will continue on February 8th. Washington has been trying to get the country's capital city of Pyongyang to disarm after a nuclear test staged by the country in early October of last year. The previous talks, held in early December of last year, did not make any progress on the situation. The U.S. has imposed financial restrictions on the country due to alleged smuggling and counterfeiting, and in September of 2005 North Korea had agreed to end its nuclear program in exchange for security and aid from the U.S. So far the nation has done nothing to show that it agreed to this.
This is a very sensitive issue of international importance, and the article does an excellent job of covering it with the depth it requires. The article begins by focusing on the recent development in the issue, and then goes into the history of what has lead up to it. Attribution is absolutely essential to this article's strength, and it spends the middle to latter part of the article giving quotations from important figures and agencies who will be involved in the talks such as the Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary for the United States about the financial restrictions aspect, and various Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministry spokespeople. These quotes give both speculation and state the intent of these officials, and give a general idea of where the situation may be headed.
An article on the same subject published by Reuters covers the story differently, with a much shorter format that requires less commitment to read. Rather than saying that China said the talks with resume Feb. 8th as the Star Tribune article did, the Reuters article says "The United States expects," which is an interesting discrepancy. Apparently at the time the Reuters article was written the U.S. was still waiting on an announcement from China, and the Reuters article has a focus on the U.S. Negotiator in the talks, with the last paragraph describing what the talks will be. The once instance of attribution is used to describe the negotiator preparing for the talks, and the article is much shorter. It's a standard attributed quote, following the format, whereas the other article frequently quoted sentence fragments and lone words.
More reporting clearly went into the Asoociated Press article printed in the Star Tribune, and the article's longer and does a better job of summarizing the situation for those who may not have followed it. The use of quotes and attribution from many of the different parties helps, and in my opinion the article covers the issue more fully.