Though it is a 2015 profile story article, the content still is relevant due to current political event, which is King Salman’s visit to Indonesia. The post was published in January 23, 2015, the same day that King Salman was crowned to the throne of Saudi Arabia.
The headline sends a message which is loud and clear, it is discussing a profile named King Salman of Saudi Arabia.
Then, a video followed right after the headline and the dateline. From its caption, it discusses about King Salman statement that he would never deviate from Saudi Arabia’s constitution.
Now, the lead:
King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud acceded to the Saudi throne on the death of his half-brother, King Abdullah.
The lead contains who, what, and why. In this particular lead, the why is included as the reason and the ‘what’ can not be separated since they are closely related or to simply put, have a cause-and-effect relation.
The lead and the video would make more sense or more relevant on the day this profile post was published, since the reason King Salman’s profile is reported in media was because the significant event he was in, which is his ascension to the throne.
The presence of key facts also help readers understand some of important information about King Salman’s life.
But in the end, the closure was discussing about King Salman’s health. To me personally, this is a bad way to end a profile news. It is even the only sub-headline present in the article. It is like putting a spotlight to a weakness of the man discussed in the article. I think the article’s quality will improve if it was given several sub-headlines, that cover the major information about King Salman.