When considering the differences of the articles one must consider how the events are presented. We see in La Jornada, the facts are more to the point and contain less detail compared to the other articles. Also, it doesn’t mention how Valerie Trierweiler spent eight days in the hospital due to a mental breakdown and also fails to mention how and why specifically President Hollande and his Ms. Trierweiler decided to end things. By this I mean the publication of the photos by Closer, which also wasn’t mentioned by La Jornada.
I feel that the English-speaking newspapers, The New York Times and The Guardian, went into extreme detail about the events that led to and proceded the separation. Also the way they addressed each person, especially Ms. Trierweiler, varied amongst the articles. The Guardian and The New York Times address Ms. Trierweiler as “first lady”, while the rest of the articles that she “shared a life” with Hollande.
La Nación addresses the situation from a politial point of view instead from an individual standpoint even though Hollande stated that this is part of his private life not one of his political life. The statements about the separation were communicated through the Palace of Elysee.
To whoever wrote this:
Please remember to include your name when posting on the blog, so that we can all see who you are.
I’m not sure why you single out La Nación as being alone in addressing the political perspective. La Jornada points out that Hollande is the most unpopular president in the modern French history, and most of the other articles speak to the political impact of the split.