A female suicide bomber armed herself with explosives at a university in Baghdad, Irag this Sunday which killed 40 and left 55 injured. It was deemed the worst day of violence since Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki announced a a revised security crackdown.
In the article that ran in the New York Times by Damien Cave and Wisam A Habeed, the bombing was the main kicker of story but more attention was actually focused on the radical Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr and his opposition to the new security plan. The journalists
In comparison to this article, CNN.com printed the same story but focused solely on the suicide bombing and the details of the event itself. I can imagine that the journalist struggles on what to include in the lead and whether or not too much detail could weaken the impact of the statement. For instance, the NY Times article emphasizes the devastation of the bombing by adding graphic imagery and language to the lead of the story.
A female suicide bomber wearing a vest packed with explosives and ball bearings blew herself up at a Baghdad university today, killing at least 40 people, and strewing fingers, pens, purses and bloody textbooks all over the ground.
CNN.com offers a fairly drab retelling of the event that lacks style and intrigue. Even the quotes that are incorporated into this story seem redundant and even unnecessary. Specifically, the quote:
"Most of the dead were students," the official said.
this seems unreasonable as a quote, the bombing occurred at a university and most were probably students which emphasizes that this quote doesn't say anything interesting or worthwhile.