Same Story, Different Entry Points
As the alerts rolled out after the verdict on WikiLeaker Bradley Manning was delivered, news outlets alerted mobile and online users in different ways that caught your attention if not provided the full picture.
There was The Washington Post, which said "Army Pfc. Bradley Manning acquitted of aiding the enemy." But there was the "but" part of the verdict that was omitted.
That part was the hed for the AP version: "Manning convicted of 5 espionage counts in WikiLeaks case," though the lede started out with the acquittal on the most serious charge.
The New York Times, on the other hand, went all Solomonic for its alert: "Manning Not Guilty of Aiding the Enemy, but Convicted of Multiple Other Counts."
And those multiple counts count. If Manning had been convicted of aiding the enemy he would have faced life in prison without parole. But the five other convictions could put him away for up to 130 years. Manning will begin to get an idea of just how long he will get up close and personal with his cell tomorrow, when his sentencing hearing starts.