The alternate news source I have chosen to read for this course is The Washington Post. I grew up around Washington, D.C., and so have read The Washington Post on and off since I was young, and am fairly comfortable with it. I have chosen to read it for this class not despite, but because it is very similar to The New York Times, as both of these newspapers have a fairly liberal bias and are even based in cities that are fairly close to each other.
I think it will be interesting to compare and contrast the content and presentation in these two similar news sources. The two papers obviously have a fairly similar target audience, given their political bias and locations, so the stories they chose to present and the way they present those stories should not radically differ. It will be interesting to corroborate the facts in the two sources together, as they are both liberally biased sources, and as such, should have fairly similar factual content.
However, more than the similarities, it will be interesting to examine the differences in these two papers, in what stories they choose to present as headlines on relatively slow news days, as well as to see the differences in the ways they present big news stories. I think it will be especially interesting to see whether some sort of a pattern emerges in the differences in the facts or stories the two papers choose to include, exclude, or highlight.