Same quote, opposite reporting?

[Peremensoe]

Mohamed ElBaradei was asked by Austrian newspaper Der Standard if he would run for the Presidency of Egypt. The story was picked up and translated by various other news agencies.

Compare his response, as quoted in the Wall Street Journal,

No, I will not stand. The best I can do is to act as an agent for change. I am a broker of change. If change comes, I will have done my duty. So I stay above the parties — that gives me more flexibility to express myself clearly. Naturally, I’d also like to be part of the future. But who is going to stand for election isn’t so important at the moment.

…with the same interview quoted in the Los Angeles Times,

I am an agent for change in Egypt. If it comes, then I would have done my duty. I stand above the parties, which gives me more flexibility to express myself clearly. Naturally I want to play a part in the future, but who stands in the election, that’s really not so important at the moment. But if the people want it, of course I would be available.

The two American headlines were, respectively, “ElBaradei Repeats He Won’t Run for President,” and “Egypt’s opposition leader says he might run for president.”

The altered wordings in the middle we can accept as the normal variance of translations, but how did each version lose a relevant bit from one end and take all its meaning from the other?

Here’s the passage from the original (ElBaradei does speak some German),

Ich bin ein Makler des Wechsels in Ägypten. Wenn er käme, hätte ich meine Pflicht getan. Ich stehe über den Parteien, das gibt mir mehr Flexibilität, mich klar auszudrücken. Natürlich möchte ich auch in der Zukunft eingebunden sein. Wer bei den Wahlen antritt, ist im Moment wirklich nicht so wichtig. Aber wenn es die Leute so wollen, würde ich selbstverständlich zur Verfügung stehen.

I can’t find the part the Wall Street Journal thinks is the headline statement. :dubious: