A Comparison of Two Newspaper Articles – September 11th Essay Example
The Times and The Mirror cater to different audiences, resulting in distinct writing styles. The Times targets middle-class individuals with higher education and reasonable income. On the other hand, The Mirror appeals to working-class people with potentially lower income and may not possess the same level of intellectualism as readers of The Times. Consequently, the articles will differ in style, presentation, structure, and level of detail based on the intended readership. This contrast is evident simply by examining the headlines.
The title of The Times, 'Bloody Echoes of Pearl Harbour,' has multiple layers and assumes a certain level of reader understanding. In contrast, The Mirror's headline, 'WE ARE ALL F***ING DYING IN HERE,' primarily aims to shock. While it includes a quotation, The Mirror has added the words 'All' and 'In' to enhance the impact on readers. The
...se additional words were not part of the original quote but were included to make the headline more comprehensive and overwhelming. Despite its smaller size relative to the article, The Times title suggests that its intention is not solely to captivate readers, but to convey a concise message. Conversely, The Mirror's headline appears to be as considerable as the article itself, indicating both its attempt to engage readers and the limited content it holds. Both titles contain an expletive, but in significantly different contexts.
The Times' article, titled 'Bloody', is both literal and explicit as it acknowledges the shedding of blood and the terrible consequences it entails. Meanwhile, the Mirror employs the word 'f***ing' in its title to shock and provoke readers into delving deeper into the article. However, there is a notable difference in the historical allusion used b
The Times, which mentions 'echoes of Pearl Harbor'. This reference implies that the readership is expected to be sophisticated enough to recognize parallels with this significant event in American history where they were caught off-guard amid an attack. On the other hand, The Mirror does not include such an allusion. Interestingly, the two articles share a similarity in the choice of their accompanying images – horrific visuals that aim to shock, frighten, and deeply impact viewers. However, the respective captions beneath these pictures differ once again. The Mirror's article utilizes highly emotive language such as 'tragedy' and 'plunge', attempting to influence the thoughts of readers. In contrast, The Times' caption is informative, providing background details to help explain the image further.
The Times briefly describes a photograph depicting a worker falling from one of the towers after the terrorist attacks. The article explains the significance of the image and provides background information, highlighting people seen leaping from windows just before the towers collapsed. On the other hand, The Mirror uses emotive language such as 'plunge' and 'certain death' to vividly describe the situation and evoke strong emotions in its audience.
When comparing the structure of the articles, there are notable differences between tabloids and broadsheets. The Mirror adopts a layout with short columns and multiple paragraphs to avoid overwhelming readers with lengthy pieces. In contrast, The Times uses long columns to accommodate extensive content, assuming its more educated readership can handle it.
Examining the actual content, there are significant disparities between the two publications. The Times includes substantial information throughout the article, highlighting aspects like the deployment of anti-terrorist units in various areas. It gradually builds
up to a poignant scene depicting destruction and suffering. Conversely, The Mirror maintains a similar tone throughout, consistently quoting individuals who express similar views from start to finish.
Two or more individuals recount instances of panic or crowd screaming. The Times employs lengthy and intricate sentences, like "An hour later, with countless people still trapped inside and rescue workers surrounding the buildings first one tower collapsed and then, half an hour later, the other disintegrated into rubble," which implies an expectation of higher intellect from its readership. Conversely, The Mirror uses concise and straightforward sentences that are effortless to comprehend, such as "the top ten floors were virtually wiped out on impact." Another notable distinction lies in the use of quotations, where both newspapers feature several individuals being quoted, but varying types of individuals hold influence within the articles.
The Times provides a comprehensive coverage of the events by including reports from eyewitnesses, influential statespeople, and experts in relevant fields. This approach ensures that readers gain a fair understanding of the events and access opinions that are valued by the public. Conversely, The Mirror primarily interviews eye-witnesses who were present during the attacks, including ordinary New Yorkers such as firefighters and workers. Their firsthand accounts are the main source of information in The Mirror's coverage.
The text highlights the contrasting readerships of The Mirror and The Times. The Mirror appeals to its readers by featuring quotes from relatable individuals, rather than prominent figures like George W. Bush and The Queen as quoted in The Times, further emphasizing the divide between the two readerships. Another difference becomes evident when examining the level of detail provided. While The
Times offers comprehensive information about the attacks on New York, Washington, and Pittsburgh, it also attempts to address the questions of who, how, and why. On the other hand, The Mirror focuses solely on describing the catastrophe without delving into deeper explanations, leaving many questions unanswered. Additionally, The Mirror employs emotive language like 'engulfed' and 'clamoured' to evoke particular feelings in the readers, guiding their perspective instead of offering a neutral viewpoint. In contrast, The Times uses sophisticated language such as 'vulnerability' and 'solidarity' to provide a clear understanding of the events and invite readers to form their own opinions.After thoroughly analyzing both articles, I favor The Times' comprehensive and illustrative piece over The Mirror's biased and impactful article. Reading The Times' content provides an evident understanding of the situation, incorporating multiple credible sources that hold significant value. Consequently, this enables readers to develop an informed perspective.
The Mirror, however, is brief and narrow in scope, attempting to sway your viewpoint and lacking in intellectual stimulation. Despite this, if you are seeking a casual read that provides a basic grasp of the situation, The Mirror will satisfy your requirements.
