The stories are about conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh announcing on air in February that he was diagnosed with advanced lung cancer.
The two leads are similar with both stating that Limbaugh revealed some information on his show. However, the lead of the article doesn’t mention the actual diagnosis ‘lung cancer’ but talks about the treatment.
The organization of the “The Guardian” article is an inverted pyramid because the important parts (like the diagnosis) are first followed by the background information (like his support of conservative politicians). The broadcast story by ABC also starts with the diagnosis and switches over to less important information (e.g. previous illnesses) as it progresses.
Length wise the article is rather short with only 15 paragraphs. In the amount of time the video story took (1:13 minutes) I was able to read out loud half of the article. As for the content, I think the video story offers the better information. The reporter talks about previous illnesses, how the cancer was first thought to be asthma and how Limbaugh has raised millions of dollars to fight cancer. I think in the context of cancer, that is more on topic than the article’s information on Limbaugh being a controversial media personality and Ronald Reagan being a fan of Limbaugh back in 1992.
Both stories included quotes from the radio show. The broadcast story also included a video segment of Limbaugh announcing his diagnosis on air. The source for the information in both stories was what the host said during his radio show.
While the writer of the article had to use several paragraphs and a lot of words to describe Limbaugh’s connection to conservative politicians, the reporter summarized it in one sentence and added pictures of Limbaugh and Trump. The video also included several other pictures and different video segments of Limbaugh and the reporter himself.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/feb/03/rush-limbaugh-reveals-advanced-lung-cancer-radio – PRINT
I take issue with The Guardian calling him a “shock jock.” That does not fit Limbaugh.
Both stories are from eight months ago when he announced his illness. ABC offers more compassion, but that’s to be expected. The Guardian, an English newspaper, may have less context for covering him, and its readers will not have the same knowledge of who/what Limbaugh represents. They would need the context.
You might note the lack of compassion and sympathy in the YouTube comments.