A study was conducted to compare coverage of the United States invasion of Grenada provided by the Third World news agency Inter Press Service (IPS) during October and November 1984, with that provided by the "New York Times." The study instrument tested the direction, themes, sources quoted, and location of the stories. The theme categories were designed to determine whether developmental issues remained IPS's primary focus while covering a hard-news story and whether the "New York Times" went beyond the event to provide more process-oriented coverage. The study involved 99 stories from IPA and 100 stories from the "New York Times." Almost one-half of the stories investigated were neutral or balanced in their treatment of the Grenada situation. One-third of IPS's stories were critical of the U.S. action, and almost 30% of the "New York Times" stories were negative in tone. The findings discredited the criticism hurled between Western media proponents and Third World leaders on the quality of each others' news services. Inter Press Service did not show an anti-Western bias in its coverage; neither did the "New York Times always support the U.S. position. The "Times" provided more interpretative, process-oriented stories than IPS, which focused more on the hard news elements of the situation. Both agencies used predominantly official sources; however, the "Times" quoted more "non-elites" than did the IPS. A five-page bibliography and seven tables are appended. (Author/HTH)