Levels of coverage.

For the second homework assignments I decided to compare between the Newspapers an article about the death of a US - Mexico border agent which occurred last Thursday. what caught my attention was the way the article were covered.
In the USA TODAY the article stood out more and even had a picture of the killed border agent. It went more into detail and even went a step furthered and had quotes from actual officials. The NEW YORK TIMES in the other hand, was very short and brief. It didn't have any quotes or official statement's in its report. As well, I had trouble finding the article which had no photo and was 1/3 of the size. The BBC really surprised me being it wasn't an American based company and had more detail and pictures about the story. It had quotes , official statement's, a map of the border between the countries and even took it a step further, the actual reason for the shooting, not just the aftermath. The NEWSDAY just like THE NEWYORK TIMES, was very brief and short about distance national story.
The sources and coverage from the local metropolitan newspaper (Newsday , The New York Times), where the least from all of the news sources. They weren't very dense and seem more of a recap. while the national paper , the USA TODAY was more reportful I understand why since its supposed to touch base on all corners of the country. The biggest shocker as i stated before was the BBC. The international newspaper had the best coverage and yet wasn't as densful and long as the USA TODAY , it provided a broader angel of the story, which would be great for someone from another country to understand and comprehend.



How does the coverage compare? Contrast the articles in terms of slant, sources, density and focus.