« Mystery of Great Pyramid Unraveled | Main | New York Times Correction Page Examples - 04/02/07 »

Earthquake Hits Off Coast of Solomon Islands; 12 Dead

According to a news article posted on Reuters.com, an earthquake has triggered a tsunami off the coast of the Solomon islands in the South Pacific, killing 12 people and leaving others missing. The quake was shallow and had a magnitude of around 8.0, a very severe quake, and triggered a tsunami around 2 stories tall. The tsunami hit residential areas and destroyed homes, and government/red cross disaster teams are working in the area to give aid to those who need it. It is expected that more quakes are to follow, as the Solomon islands are located in an area prone to extensive volcanic and earthquake activity.

Reuters reports the story by describing the events and giving facts and figures, intially. The lead gets across the main event with ease, then gives figures and talks about how the quake progressed. Solomon Islands' government officials are quoted, and Australia's reaction to the event is given, that being that they put out a warning out of fear of a repeat of a previous tsunami threat. The second chunk of the article gives some reaction from residents of the islands, and figures/predictions by the expert seismologists saying that more quakes in the coming days are likely.

An article on the same event was published in the New York Times and featured contributions from the Associated Press. At the time this article was published, exact death numbers were uncertain. There's also not as much data in the article that compares it to similar, past storms like the Reuters article. However, after giving the basic information, the article does an excellent job of introducing the human element that people can relate to, by giving the personal accounts and reactions of people who lived through the disaster, which is its strongest point. It also gives some technical information about plates being what caused the quake and tsunami, something the Reuters article left out.

I feel like I prefer the New York Times' work getting the personal accounts, but there's more concrete and definite information in the Reuters article, so in that respect I think Reuters is better. Each succeeds at different things but I guess I'd prefer the Reuters one.