In the Los Angeles Times story of the University of Texas (UT) shootings Tuesday, the progression of information was similar to the inverted pyramid model.
It starts out with a hard hitting news lead stating the who, what, when, and where that summarzied all the details that took place on UT's campus, even attributing authorities to avoid speculation. The article then goes into four fact blocks progressing from the most important information to the least important information. After the fourth fact block the reader could have stopped reading the article and known all the pertinent information without finishing the story.
After the fourth fact block, the Los Angeles Times goes into eyewitness accounts of the shooting and ends the article stating the campus was locked down and classes were canceled.
I feel like this story is effective because the reporter chose an inverted pyramid style and put the most important facts right away in the article. After all the important information was discovered in the story, the reader could have stopped reading the article and walked away with complete knowledge of what had happened. However, if you chose to read on you were provided with a human impact story and eyewitness accounts of the scene Tuesday at the University of Texas.
I do not think this story should have been reported to the public differently. It was clear, went straight to the facts, and, if the reader chose to, was able to read the entire article with a full account of what authorities have said to what eyewitnesses saw.