I chose a national story about Acute Flaccid Myelitis, A.F.M. The news article, where I first found this news, was from the New York Times and had a lot of information about the virus. The news broadcast was found on CNN’s website.
The lead in the article was decent, could have been more interesting, but got the point across to the reader. In the broadcast, the lead is sort of crappy in my opinion. The lead in the broadcast just seems boring and not very interesting unless you could be affected by the story. Both stories are structured well in what they say.
The article definitely has more information than the broadcast. This is probably because the broadcast is only given so much time to tell viewers what is happening. In the article though, it tells readers what the virus is, how to prevent it, how common the virus is and what causes the virus. Whereas the broadcast just talked about what the virus is, how common it is, and side-effects.
The article got most of its information from the C.D.C. and had some direct quotes from them. The broadcast also received its information from the C.D.C., but I believe they paraphrased everything that was said. Overall, both stories gave credit to the C.D.C. for the information.
The article didn’t have any pictures, but the broadcast of course did. The broadcast showed a family affected by the virus. The broadcast also showed part of an interview with the father of a child with the virus.