I'm not entirely sure that they are contradictory. At least, I can come up with a (somewhat forced) interpretation of the quote from Todd which reconciles it with the French info. The idea is that when Todd says that "pressing the left trigger makes you block", that's in the context of having a weapon in your right hand. If you have a weapon in your right hand, pressing the right trigger makes you swing the weapon in your right hand. But if you have a weapon in both hands, then how do you block? Well, according to the French info, you press both triggers. And here's how I think we can interpret Todd as also meaning something like this: when he says "pressing the left trigger makes you block", he means that pressing the left trigger makes you block
when you are also pressing the right trigger. The thing is, given the new casting system, this might not work for spells. Holding down the right trigger and pressing the left trigger might alter the spell you are casting, but it won't make you block.
Of course, that's a strained way of reading Todd's words. And there are other questions it raises:
1) What about if you're using a one-handed weapon without anything in the other hand, or you are using a two-handed weapon? Answer: easy, pressing left trigger makes you block, whether or not you are also holding down the right trigger.
2) What about if you are holding down the left trigger and then press the right trigger - would that make you block? Answer: well, if my interpretation is right, then yes it would.
3) But then, why does Todd only refer to the left trigger, rather than saying something like "pressing one trigger while holding down the other"? Answer: this is exactly why it's a strained interpretation.
But, it's worth keeping in mind:
1) Just because a journalist puts something in quotation marks, it doesn't mean that this is exactly what Todd uttered. Journalists routinely misquote. Examples can be provided upon request.
2) Whether my interpretation is right or not seems to depend a lot on the context in which Todd was saying whatever he said. Depending on what sorts of presuppositions were in play about what the character had equipped, what it was doing in combat, and so on, then my interpretation is more or less natural.
Anyway: just some thoughts if you want to remain optimistic.