The progression of information in the NBC news article, "Nuclear-like in its intensity, Russian meteor blast is the largest since 1908," appears to roughly follow the inverted pyramid format.
The story begins with the lead, which addresses the what, where, and when pertaining to the incident. The authors then progresses to the next paragraph where they reiterate what happened in more detail and throw in quotes from witnesses. They also provide links to videos of the meteor explosion above Chelyabinsk, Russia. After multiple quotes of residents reacting to the incident and describing the general hysteria that took place afterwards, the stories details get narrower in the following paragraph as the authors describe the dimensions of the meteor itself, and other qualitative facts about the situation. Including when it exploded, how close to the ground it was, its velocity, its weight, and so forth. The article then got into the after mass of the meteor explosion. Touching on the injuries sustained, the buildings damaged, and noting that there were no serious consequences so far. The authors ended the article including more reaction quotes and a fact about NASA discussing strategies for developing an asteroid early warning systems. I think the format of this article made the shish kabob example for modeling stories more clear. It spaced out the facts of the incident between reaction quotes and background information; similar to the order meat and vegetables are interspersed on a kabob. Sources were never clumped to one part of the story and it was well attributed.
The order of information is done effectively in this article. It started with what initially drew the reader in to click on the headline: what happened and where. The details get more specific and less relevant as the story progresses, which is expected in a well-written report.