I found throughout this article, there was more scientifically technical information than would be found in a New York Times article today. The way it was written, the intended audience has at least some science background. Early in the article, there was a bit more jargon than I was comfortable with, or I felt was appropriate for an article intended for the general public, but as I read further it became a much easier read.

I felt the molecular drawings, while interesting to look at, were unnecessary in a New York Times article. The publication is intended for a general audience, most of whom would not understand the visual representation of a molecule.

The study discussed in the article was quite interesting, and seems to be the beginning studies of modern day Plan B contraceptives. I am very curious to know if the drug discussed in this article is the same one that is a popular contraceptive today, or if this study was more of a starting point for other pharmaceutical companies to begin their own oral contraceptive research.

Overall, I felt had this study been done today, this same article in the New York Time would have been much shorter, and held much less hard fact. It would be much more opinionated, and contained less jargon to make it more accessible to the general public.