War stories then & now

In comparing an news story on the Civil War to one on the current war in Iraq, one will be able to notice a striking difference between the two.

The meat and potatoes are there: both stories are about a war. Both stories give the reader information about a particular battle about the war. It's the presentation that's different; Villard's article on the first Battle of Bull Run is like something you might encounter at a dinner party, while Roeder's account of Iraq is a fast-food variety. (Yes, I went with the food connection.)

That is not to say that Roeder's story is bad; it is just that it is easier to read than Villard's. Roeder uses shorter paragraphs and follows the contemporary journalism style. Villard, on the other hand, has some challenging paragraphs in his story. His is a story that you would have to take the time to read.