The Times uses Combs legal name, none of his various nicknames in the headline, which many sites tend to do. They highlight that he was sentenced to more than 4 years in prison, which is one of the most important facts from this story, and they choose to use his description of his conduct, which was 'Sick'. They could have used proper language to describe the acts he was accused of, but they chose to use his own wording for what he has done.

They then restate that he was sentenced to 4 years, and end by stating the "global attention" this case has received for "violence and fetishistic sex marathons," a very vague description of the acts in question.

Following the lede, the Times quotes the judge overseeing the case on how the sentence sends a message to abusers and victims that acts such as Combs will be met with real accountability. They do not mention the exact time he will spend in jail, which is 4 years and 2 months, how many charges he was convicted of, or the additional fines he must pay as part of the sentence.

CNN chooses to call Combs Sean 'Diddy' Combs, using one of his popular nicknames rather than just his legal name. They highlight that he was sentenced to 4 years in prison, a major piece of information, and say that this sentence is due to a "prostutution-related conviction." This headline is already more specific than the NYT headline, where they choose to use Combs description of his conduct rather than what the conviction was.

This first graph gives the readers all the specifics they need to know regarding the sentencing, followed by direct quoting from Combs himself describing the nature of his actions and his apologies. To me, this report seems about as unbiased as it could get (besides calling Combs 'Diddy).

In comparing NYT and CNN's headlines, ledes and overall framing of their reports, one can see clear differences in how Combs is portrayed, as well as what information regarding his sentencing is deemed more important to the stories.