Tony Parsons and Mark Hertsgaard

1267 Words3 Pages

Tony Parsons and Mark Hertsgaard

The tabloid article was written by Tony Parsons and the broadsheet was

written by Mark Hertsgaard. The context of theses articles are the

analysis of the September eleventh attacks. The political context is

the debate on America's government. This assay is to focus on the

comparism and the context of these articles.

The target audience for the mirror article are those who want to be

amused and want accessible language, this type of newspaper is called

a tabloid newspaper. The vocabulary is simple and sentences short. The

article doesn't going into profoundness in its outline of the events

the article could be also aimed at people who are in a bit of a hurry

and want something simple and fast to read. The target audience for

the Guardian are people who are interested in significant news and

less humour, this type is a broadsheet newspaper. It is targeted at

people who want to go into more depth on the incident and who want

more information, also Hertsgaard's article is less biased so anyone

would be able to read it.

Tony Parsons' purpose is to make the readers feel overwhelmed with

sympathy for the Americans because of the devastating effects of

9/11.He uses phrases like "unspeakable act so cruel," to make clear to

the readers his feelings of 9/11. Mark Hertsgaard's purpose is to

inform the reader of the fact that America's "state friendly

controlled press" and government is the reason why Americans "remain

largely ignorant" to the outside world and what is happening in it.

The main points expressed in the mirror article are the grief and

sorrow caused to the nation on the incident of 9/11. He...

... middle of paper ...

...de world. The two articles contemplate on

different issues, Parsons talks about the incident of September 11 and

its effects on Americans as well as the reasons why America was

attacked. On the other hand Hertsgaard concentrates on how the

Americans have gone back to living their lives as before the incident,

because of the leaders who are not informing them of the full details

of America's activities in the world affairs. He also mentions the

media who also fail to challenge their leaders causing the Americans

to be ignorant about different matters.

Parsons uses emotive language and different techniques to make his

arguments effective and to reinforce his arguments to the readers.

Hertsgaard's language on the other hand is more balanced allowing the

reader to decide for themselves on what they believe in the matter.

Open Document