Friday 18th August 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, Daily Mail, The Times

The Sunthe sun

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Barcalona Bastards

Author(s): Jonathan Reilly (Senior Reporter)

Analysis: The Sun chooses the image of the individual lying on the pavement with two police officers standing over them to dominate their front page. The article is highly emotive and focusses on creating anger towards the individual “maniac driver” who “mows down tourists” including the details that “one terrorist killed, two held.” In its short description, he paper includes that the La Ramblas area of Barcalona is “popular with British visitors” heightening the sense of fear in that British people and families are not safe when they are on their summer holidays. The sources for the information are not provided and there are no quotes included within the article, though we are left to assume the figures for those injured and information regarding the arrests are from the Spanish emergency services and police. There is no description of Islamic State claiming responsibility for the attack on this front page. The coverage of the attack is present on pages 4-7 inside the paper.


The Guardianthe guardian

Topic of article:  Crime

Headline: Terror strikes Barcalona

Author(s): Giles Tremlett (Madrid), Sam Jones, Jennifer Rankin (Brussels)

Analysis: The Guardian describes the Las Ramblas attack in detail and provides a contextual perspective, describing the similarities with attacks in France, Germany, Sweden and the UK. The article provides a detailed description of the scene in Barcalona, emphasising that this was intended to injure tourists due to this being the height of holiday season and it being one of the most popular roads in Barcalona. Furthermore it also provides tragic elements such as “several pushchairs could be seen abandoned at the side of the street.” The article includes quotes from a number of eye witnesses including an off-duty nurse and communicates a scene of panic and confusion with “rumours flew around the city” describing how people were unsure of what to do. The image chosen for the article is of two police officers standing over an individual who is lying on the pavement with their hands over their eyes. There is less description of Islamic State within the article apart from that they claimed responsibility for the attack. They do provide some background regarding Oukabir, who has now been arrested, including his photograph and describing that he is believed to be from North Africa but is a resident in Spain. The coverage of the attack is present on pages 3 to 5.

Daily Maildaily mail

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Massacre of holiday families

Author(s): Vanessa Allen (News Reporter)

Analysis: The article focusses on describing the chaotic scene at Las Ramblas yesterday afternoon. The horror of those there having to flee for their lives and “broken bodies lay in pools of blood” with “prams and toys” also on the floor is described in full, instilling fear in the reader. There is little detailed description of the facts such as that Isis have claimed responsibility for the attack, suggesting that this front page was sent to print earlier than the other papers and hence why it focuses on setting the terrible scene rather than more detail. There is also a clear impression that “British holiday-makers” may be amongst those injured in the attack as it is a popular destination and therefore implies that people aren’t even safe on their family holiday. Where the information is from in the article is not detailed and no quotes are provided. The image chosen is the same as that in The Sun and The Guardian and includes an inset of the arrested individual Driss Outkabir. The coverage continues inside the paper on page 4.


The Timesthe times

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Evil strikes again

Author(s): Adam Sage, Charles Bremner, Sarah Morris, Fiona Hamilton (Barcalona)

Analysis: The Times describes what is known about the attack in Barcalona, including details about the arrest of Driss Oukabir. The article provides a detailed description of the event including the current death toll and number injured. The story appears to be evolving as many questions remain unresolved including whether the suspect who was shot dead by police trying to drive out of the city was the driver of the van involved. The Times discusses that this attack was the first by Islamic State in Spain, and that previous attacks in Barcalona had been related to Basque separatist groups. The article includes quotes from Amaq (the Islamic State news agency), the Spanish police, a tourist who was present at the scene and tweets from King Felipe of Spain and Trump and part of the official statement from Theresa May (full available here: The image chosen is of a family group surrounding an individual on the floor with some security staff also around them.  Their descriptions relating to Islamic State are the word “evil” in the headline, the quote from Amaq explaining that the attack targeted Spain as it was a “coalition state” with the U.S. fighting against them. The coverage of the attack is present on pages 2-5 and page 31.


Front page images from: BBC The Papers (

Reviewed by: Alice Edwards

Monday 31st July 2017

Monday 31st July 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

The Sun_97132514_sun

Topic of article: The Royal Family

Headline: Grubby blood money

Author(s): Jack Royston (Royal Correspondent)

Analysis: The Sun express outrage at the use of film to be used in the Channel four show ‘Diana: In Her Own Words’ around the the 20th anniversary of her death. The quote comes from “ex-royal aide Dickie Arbiter” who is clearly unsupportive of the tapes being shown as they are described as “tawdry” and including Diana discussing her marriage to Prince Charles. The use of the word “pals” and citing this ex-royal aide suggests that those who had known Diana best are against the television programme including this and there is nothing on this front page to argue to support Channel Four “TV bosses” including it. It is unclear what sort of outcome will occur from this, though articles like this just increase promotion of the show if it is to be aired later this year. Moreover, Diana is a difficult character for the press as they both promoted her as the ‘people’s princess’ and also make arguably less supportive choices regarding her at different points (see Daily Mail below.) Moreover, the question of if this is morally wrong, to publicly show unseen tapes of someone after they have passed away if it will change their public image (or of others), is probably a wider issue may to come to a head here considering the public and press being so involved in Diana and her life.

The Guardianguardian.750

Topic of article:  Politics

Headline: Tensions flair in cabinet over free movement

Author(s): Anushka Asthana (Political Editor)

Analysis: The Guardian describes the clash within the Conservative party with the prime minister and some supporters being undermined by those MPs who are in dissent who tend to support softer Brexit in regard to the ‘transitional deal’ including immigration and trade issues. The article describes the rebelling side as Phillip Hammond, Amber Rudd and notable others who appear to be stepping out of party line of hard Brexit regarding tough campaign issues such as immigration. In addition, those attempting to reinforce that line are described as May, David Davis, Liam Fox and Iain Duncan Smith.  The article describes how public statements on Brexit are being made by those Rudd and Hammond that have not been agreed with by other members of the party, as highlighted by a quote from Fox. These actions from Hammond and co. are particularly pertinent at a time whilst parliament is in recess, with many MPs who support Brexit away abroad (May, Johnson and Fox) and appears a somewhat manipulative move by Hammond. The article enhances a sense of deep division within the party including secret letters sent by Rudd, quotes from both sides describing uncertainty and the poignant reminder that the issue of the “transitional deal” has been “forced up the agenda” due to May’s performance in the general election. Overall, the article makes the party seem even more fragile and the Brexit negotiations fraught with tensions that are worsening rather than lessening.

Daily Maildaily_mail.750

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Car rental firms don’t do repairs you pay for

Author(s): Louise Eccles (Personal Finance Correspondent)

Analysis: The newspaper reports the results of its own investigation into car rental companies charges for British customers. The newspaper is focussing on the frustrations of car rental customers who are charged for minor damages they may have caused to the car whilst they are renting it. The paper reports that the companies aren’t using the charges to fix the specific damage charged for but just fix the car when they sell it on or lower the selling price. The paper commonly pioneers a campaign like this, trying to seek and expose an unfair truth for the general public. However, as it has now passed this information onto the trading standards officers there is likely nothing that the paper or customers can actually do, except perhaps the action of boycotting the names rental companies on this basis which may be why they listed them, that is productive from this suspicion-mongering article. There is also the interest in the tone that this injustice is being done to “British tourists” as if rental cars aren’t used by people from all countries or that these companies don’t have British bases or charge tourists who are travelling in the U.K. in this way.


The Times_97132510_times

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: Hammond: we won’t be tax haven after Brexit  

Author(s): Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor); Adam Sage (Paris Correspondent)

Analysis: The article reports that Philip Hammond, chancellor, has made statements about Britain not changing it’s tax policy to become a ‘tax haven’ after Brexit. The article is set on the background of Hammond becoming more and more dominant and pioneering the ‘softer’ Brexit in contrast with what Prime Minister May, Brexit Secretary David Davis and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson have as their message. Moreover, the paper describes how Hammond himself in January said that lowering taxes to attract businesses was an option (and a negotiating card) if Britain lost access to the single market, which could still happen. Hammond appears to be trying to be more conciliatory towards European countries, by now saying this in a French newspaper interview, in contrast to his previous more aggressive comments to a German paper in January. The article also describes the issue between Vince Cable suggesting that Johnson could resign after the split in the party over Brexit, with Johnson emphasising this was not going to happen. The article tends to be more balanced than the Guardian, with them citing how May and Hammond and Johnson and Hammond work together and therefore seeming not completely divided.


Front page images from: BBC The Papers ( , The Guardian may be better read at the Guardian website or Pressreader ( or Kiokso (

Reviewed by: Alice Edwards


Wednesday 14th June, 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Metro, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

The MetroMetro

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: May goes into extra time

Author(s): Daniel Binns (Current Affairs and Music)

Analysis: Inform readers about the current Conservative-DUP coalition negotiations and the impacts this may have on Britain. The Metro attempts to tie politics to sports with its headline referencing the France-England friendly played last night. This may be used to generate more interest from members of the public who would not normally bother to read the political news. The tone of article is highly critical of May and the DUP negotiations, pointing out numerous demands and possible conciliations that the Tories will have to agree to in order to hold power. A particular focus is on the return of the ‘troubles’ between religious groups in Northern Ireland, with quotes from the opposing party (to the DUP) showing how precarious the situation is. Overall the article shows readers that the consequences of the possible deal could be bad for the UK, and that when a former PM from your own party warns you to not do something to stay in power then it may not be such a good idea after all!

The GuardianGuardian

Topic of article: Politics, European Union

Headline: May told: UK can still back out of Brexit

Author(s): Jessica Elgot (Political Editor), Anushka Asthana (Political Editor)

Analysis: Report on Theresa May’s recent state visit to Paris and the ongoing negotiations surrounding Britain leaving the EU. The Guardian begins with the headline ‘May told…’, an opening statement that sets the tone of the article, with May placed in the position of an embattled and subdued PM who is now taking orders from European and British ministers, rather than giving them. Macron tells her she can still turn back on leaving the EU, a proverbial olive branch or a slight dig at her sudden weakness in negotiations? The Guardian and other left of centre papers often quote the assurances of European politicians that Britain can still reverse its decision, perhaps as a way of weakening the hardline stance that the Conservatives and right-wing media take. The use of words such as ‘tight-lipped’ ‘overshadowed’ and ‘disappointment’ also create a negative impression of May and her current position, showing her as weak and ineffectual. The article then transitions into an analysis of the EU negotiations, where May is shown to be turning back on her previous commitments to a ‘hard Brexit’, again presenting her as weak. There are numerous quotes from Conservative ministers but it would have been nice to have the opinion of a Labour minister or other opposition figure.

The Daily MailMail

Topic of article: Health, NHS

Headline: Cut-price doctor will see you now

Author(s): Claire Duffin (Reporter)

Analysis: Discuss the impact physician associates may have on the NHS and healthcare delivery in the UK. Going with a typical sensationalising headline, the Mail aims to drive up public concern around seeing a ‘cut-price doctor’ by making them imagine they are being called into see one of them. They hope to insinuate that the care you will receive is sub-par, backed up by the paltry two years of training they have before entering the medical profession. The Mail also calls them ‘medics’, suggesting that you may unwittingly be given one of these semi-doctors when you are in grave need of a fully trained medic. The general aim of the article is to raise public awareness of the physician associates program and to create fear that the public will receive poorer medical care as a result. And while these are important concerns that must be addressed there is a lack of self-awareness in the paper, as analysis of the scheme does not considered the impacts of governmental policies and large societal prejudices that result in a cash deficient NHS and poor staffing numbers that originally drove the creation of this scheme, instead approaching the issue as a stand-alone problem. There should have been more quotes from working doctors within the NHS and perhaps physician associates in order to fully understand the respective positions.

The TimesTimes

Topic of article: Politics, European Union

Headline: Hammond pushes Tories to ditch Brexit trade plan

Author(s): Oliver Wright (Policy Editor), Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor)

Analysis: Report on the negotiations going on within the Conservative party around leaving the EU and the changes that have occurred following the election. The Times focuses on the changing stances on numerous Brexit policies as the Conservatives deal with the fallout of the general election, and presents much of the information as a ‘Times exclusive’. This helps to show readers that the paper gets information that others do not and hopes to build brand loyalty. The bulk of the article focuses on the two camps within the Tory party, the Remainers and Brexiteers and seems to be setting the stage for a larger battle. With the opportunities available to ambitious politicians after the election, the paper seems to be saying, there will be a number of policy flashpoints, with one department even described as being in a ‘street-fighting mode’. Despite all the potentially negative consequences this could have for the Conservatives, their ability to guide a stable government and many local policies the Times does not delve too deeply into the disagreements or likely fallouts, instead choosing to present this as good, almost light-hearted (see ‘street-fighting mode’, like a videogame) discussions, surely not a stance it would have taken were Labour in this position. The paper does a good job of explaining the customs union and how it impacts negotiations for its readers, which allows a deeper understanding of the issues discussed. But it would have been nice to have quotes from the Treasury or other parties involved.

Front page images from:

Reviewed by: Sam Hewitt


VIEWPOINTS 4: Our thoughts on the 2017 UK general election.

Its been a long election. At BTH we aim to analyse, discuss and explore the aim, agenda, and bias of international, national and local newspapers to as many members of the public as possible. Still, each of our writers bring their own opinions and biases in the work that we do, in our analysis, and how we interpret the news. This invariably affects the work we produce, and so in the name of full transparency, today we give you a glimpse of our opinions and worldviews.

Last, but not least, we bring you the thoughts of Bruno Gnaneswaran, a co-founder of Between the Headlines.

I have been unable to vote in the last three general elections despite desperately wanting to and having the urge to. I want to be involved in the democratic process that will have huge consequences on my life and the life of others. Our current society is crying for change. In order to have real change, in order to have a truly representative parliament and government, we need to have a serious discussion on our out-dated first-past-the-post voting system. The current voting system is not fair, undemocratic and ensures that not all votes count equally. During the last general election, 74% of our votes were wasted and did not make a difference to the outcome. Every vote should count equally.
The media has a significant influence on this democratic process and here at BTH we believe that although the media is incredibly important, it needs to be held accountable when it is not delivering reliable, accurate and truly representative journalism. My personal ideologies and policies are not in line with the Conservatives and I am very pleased to see the right-wing media, despite its strong efforts, has not stopped Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour manifesto to show what policies are needed to help fight social injustice. Britain is the fifth largest economy in the world and instead of helping those who are already wealthy, lets have a government and society that helps those who are vulnerable and provides equal opportunities for all. Lets have a better education system for our children, a functioning health and social care system and adequate policing to keep us safe.
This was a nasty, individualistic and chaotic campaign run by Theresa May and we need to remind those that represent us that this is not what we ask of our politicians. Today, the people have made their voices heard – this is not what we want from our leaders. We do not care about personalities, we care about policies. We want politicians that want to help fight the serious inequalities that exists here in the U.K. and throughout the world. Today has shown us there is a momentum and a wish for a more equal, just and compassionate society.
We hope you’ve enjoyed this special edition. Next week we return to our analysis newspaper headlines.
We always welcome new writers, so drop us an e-mail if you are interested in joining our team.

VIEWPOINTS 3: Our thoughts on the 2017 UK general election

Its been a long election. At BTH we aim to analyse, discuss and explore the aim, agenda, and bias of international, national and local newspapers to as many members of the public as possible. Still, each of our writers bring their own opinions and biases in the work that we do, in our analysis, and how we interpret the news. This invariably affects the work we produce, and so in the name of full transparency, today we give you a glimpse of our opinions and worldviews.

Below we bring you the thoughts of Alice Edwards, one of the co-founders of Between the Headlines.

I have voted both Labour and Green over the years, am a supporter of the concept of a Progressive Alliance on the left. Considering the impact of the media on this general election, there’s one point that cannot go ignored: print press is not where it’s at. Despite acknowledging the media bias against Corbyn with the infamous ‘Don’t chuck Britain in the Cor Bin’ and the London Evening Standard (current editor: George Osbourne) ever-detached from real Londoners and their politics, coming out in blunt support of the Conservatives saying they were “best for our capital.” However, despite this coverage, Corbyn still did unexpectedly well. I feel that the significant growth in youth vote and Corbyn’s success indicates that it’s the freedom provided of online politics – whether it be through memes and Corbyn’s dabbing or it’s use in organising and mobilising a big part of the electorate – was what got people interested.

VIEWPOINTS 2: Our thoughts on the 2017 UK general election

Its been a long election. At BTH we aim to analyse, discuss and explore the aim, agenda, and bias of international, national and local newspapers to as many members of the public as possible. Still, each of our writers bring their own opinions and biases in the work that we do, in our analysis, and how we interpret the news. This invariably affects the work we produce, and so in the name of full transparency, today we give you a glimpse of our opinions and worldviews.

Next up in our exclusive Between the Headlines series is Samuel Hewitt.

I voted Labour yesterday because I believe they offered the hope of a government that put people and compassion first, above private interest and capital. While I was initially sceptical of Jeremy Corbyn’s ability to rise above a media that is inherently rightwing and appeal to a wide range of UK voters, I have always agreed with his policies. And I am pleasantly surprised that his and Labour’s tactics have seemed to worked magnificently, using social media and grassroots campaigns to harness the hope and power of the youth vote, along with those who are disenfranchised with the current political structure.

Labour may not have gained enough seats to form a government but this election was about so much more, and it showed that there really is an appetite for social justice in the UK. The Conservatives tried to run on a platform of individual interest, of fear and concern over ‘the other side’ and although they now form a government they do so in a much weakened position.

As a medical student who will likely move directly into a position of near total job security, adequate pay, and ample opportunities in the private sector, it is not me who will stand to lose the most with a Conservative government. I think its important for people in a similar position to consider what type of society we want to live in moving forward – do we want one where public services and social care are cut because of the long discredited phantom of ‘austerity’, leading to over 30,000 deaths a year because the Tories prefer to give tax cuts to the banks and wealthy businesses? One where, for all their talk of economic proficiency and the failings of the opposition, the national debt has tripled in 7 years and the Tories are now on the brink of forming a coalition government with a party that is anti-abortion and gay rights, are climate sceptics and have direct links with terrorist groups? Or do we want one where people have access to universal health care, access to essential services like carers and a winter fuel allowance? Where we understand that the economy isn’t like our bank account and by cutting spending drastically we actually starve the economy and weaken it? One where we take care of the many, and not just the few? I know which one I prefer.

VIEWPOINTS: Our thoughts on the 2017 UK General election.

Its been a long election. At BTH we aim to analyse, discuss and explore the aim, agenda, and bias of international, national and local newspapers to as many members of the public as possible. Still, each of our writers bring their own opinions and biases in the work that we do, in our analysis, and how we interpret the news. This invariably affects the work we produce, and so in the name of full transparency, today we give you a glimpse of our opinions and worldviews.

To start it all off is Anjali Menezes, a non-UK, non-EU national, studying in the UK for the past 5 years on a student visa.

As a Canadian citizen, and an international student in the UK on a student visa, I have an outsider’s view on the UK general election. Did I vote? No. Could I have voted? Yes.

As a common wealth citizen living in the UK I could have voted in this election, and I am not entirely proud that I did not. Voting is an incredible privilege that I gave up last night. I voted in the 2015 UK general election, and just a few months later I also voted in the Canadian 2015 general election. To be honest, I felt a bit like a fraud. UK citizens do not have the right to vote in Canadian elections, so the right of common wealth citizens to vote in the UK is not reciprocated. I voted with my own ideals in the UK election, but I honestly do not have a vested interest in the UK. I am Canadian and hope to return to my home country very soon.

I have a significant bias and conflict of interest here. International tuition fees are immense, and my true hope is that the pound will fall. In both Canada and the UK, my political views are strongly anti-conservative, so even though I did not vote,  I am upset that the Labour Party did not win last night. However, I am pleased that there was no Conservative majority.

Friday 9th June 2017

Friday 9th June 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

Today we bring you some of the UK’s headlines following the 2017 general election. Stay tuned later for our writers’ views on last night. As of this morning, the final results were not confirmed.


The Sunsun.9 June.jpg

Topic of article: UK Politics

Headline: MAYHEM

Author(s): Tom Newton Dunn (Political Editor)

Analysis: The Sun covers the predictions from the exit polls, which suggest the result of a hung parliament with the conservatives having 314 seats, Labour with 266, Scottish National Party with 34, and Lib Dems with 14. There is very little text on this front page, besides a statement of results from the exit polls. However, on a closer examination of what was included on this front page, we can see suggestions of the editor’s overall opinion on last night’s results. One line of the author’s impressions makes the front page: “[May’s election] ended in disaster”, suggesting that the writer had hoped for a Conservative majority in parliament. Additionally, the Sun brings in an interesting set of images to their front page, with the leaders of five of the political parties, all smiling except for Jeremy Corbyn, depicted with a scowl (possibly mid-argument). So why has this particular image of the Labour party’s leader been chosen? Is the Sun trying to highlight him in some unflattering way? Is the paper trying to assume the leaders’ emotional responses to the election results in their depictions on the front page? Maybe. On the other hand, Labour has gained 34 seats in this election, and UKIP has lost their only seat, so why is Paul Nuttall grinning on the front page?


The Guardianguardian.9 June.jpg

Topic of article:  UK Politics

Headline: Exit poll shock for May

Author(s): Anusha Asthana (Political Editor); Rowena Mason (Deputy Political Editor)

Analysis: The article discusses the predictions of a 10pm exit poll, suggesting the UK was headed for a hung parliament. The authors go on the try a draw of picture of the atmospheres in the Conservative and Labour party headquarters the night of the election. The authors are still cautious however, pointing to the fact that the 2015 exit polls suggested a hung parliament, while that election resulted in a Conservative majority. The article appears to paint the Labour party in a favourable light, while being quite critical of the Conservatives. Jeremy Corbyn’s “buoyant” campaign was described as a “gruelling seven week tour”, as the authors try and paint a picture of a very hard working and positive leader. Meanwhile, Theresa May is described with considerably less enthusiasm as “feeling good”. The choice of imagery on this front page is considerably different, with Jeremy Corbyn as the only party leader to make the editing cut. He’s shown smiling with two voters. A very different expression on his face than on this morning’s Sun.

Daily Maildaily_mail.9 June

Topic of article: UK Politics


Author(s): Jason Groves (Political Editor)

Analysis: This article focuses on the results of the exit polls, suggesting a hung parliament. Jason Groves (article author) blasts Theresa May as the paper appears incredibly disappointed by the Conservative results. The piece picks very specific quotes to paint the Conservative leader in a now unfavourable light, as “one minister” (who remains unnamed) calling her campaign “the worst in living memory”, as her plans “backfired disastrously”. Still, the paper remains critical of all the British political parties, with no leader painted in a favourable light. Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn is called “profoundly dangerous”, while everyone else is simply lumped together as “a rag bag of other parties”. Though this remains a very opinionated piece, the Daily Mail appears to think every political party in the country is equally horrible.


The Timesthe_times.9 June.jpg

Topic of article: UK Politics

Headline: May’s big gamble fails

Author(s): Francis Elliott (Political Editor); Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor)

Analysis: The Times covers the results of the exit polls along with how this has affected the value of the pound against the US dollar. The authors’ views on the exit poll results echo the opinions of other UK papers in seeing this as a major loss for Theresa May’s Conservative Party. Strong words are used to depict the prospect of a hung parliament as a “humiliating prospect” as the snap election “spectacularly backfired”. Additionally, the opinion of the former chancellor adds to May’s defeat, as George Osborne calls for her to resign if the “catastrophic” predictions of the exit polls prove accurate. Last night’s results are put into context with Brexit negotiations and the falling value of the pound. While still acknowledging the fact that exit polls did not accurately predict the results of the 2015 UK general election, the authors seem confident in its results, describing its predictions of the 2010 and 2005 elections as “spot on”. In this article, the only other political party mentioned on the front page is Labour, with one quote from the shadow foreign secretary stating that if the party was called to provide the next government, they would do so “in a unified way”.


Front page images from: Kiokso (

Reviewed by: Anjali Menezes

Monday 5th June 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

The Sunsun.750

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Jihadi killer in an Arsenal shirt

Author(s): Tom Wells (Chief Reporter), Mike Sullivan (News Reporter)

Analysis: The Sun uses the same image as the Daily Mail and The Times but uses text on its front page to describe background information about “Abz” the “ringleader” of the three suspects. The information provided about the individual emphasises that he was just like any other Londoner, working for Transport for London and KFC and being an Arsenal supporter, but then became “radicalised over the past year” leading up to the attack, describing him as a “HOME-grown jihadi.” The article is extremely emotive, using language such as “slaughtered” and “murderous spree” with the tag-line under The Sun banner of “we are not afraid” oddly juxtaposing the sense of fear evoked throughout the article.  It isn’t clear why the article has focussed in on one of the individuals – perhaps he was the only one they could find any information about or just the closest in this photograph – or where this information about him came from.


The Guardianguardian.750

Topic of article:  Crime

Headline: Seven dead, 21 critically hurt: May says ‘enough is enough’

Author(s):  Robert Booth (News Reporter), Vikram Dodd (Senior Reporter), Lisa O’Carroll (Brexit Correspondent), Matthew Taylor (Environment Correspondent)

Analysis: In the aftermath of the London Bridge, The Guardian provides some details of the current situation and what the police are doing regarding gaining more information on the three men involved. By focussing on what is being done by the police rather than a detailed description of the events on Saturday night, the article has a generally less emotive and more calming tone than the other articles. Moreover, this sense that the police are taking control of the situation is highlighted in the article by describing a number of the arrests in relation to the attacks, the main person being quoted being counter-terrorism chief Mark Rowley and the justification for the shoot-to-kill action by the police. However, this is somewhat undermined by the source, Erisa Gasparri, claiming she had reported one of the suspected attackers to the police two years previously which is suggesting that counter-terrorism measures aren’t as effective as they could be.

Daily Maildaily_mail.750

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Bloody day all of Britain said: Enough is enough

Author(s): None (Only image on the front page)

Analysis: Using the same photograph as The Times and The Sun, the Mail uses red circles to highlight the bodies and a smaller image of two of the suspected attackers described as “swaggering jihadis during the killing spree” inset. By using Theresa May’s quote of “enough is enough” as if “all of Britain” feel this way creates this sense of a turning point in Britain’s policy on terror, that this attack must somehow push the government to become in some way more effective against terrorist organisations after this “3rd attack in 10 weeks.” Though there is not much text on the page both the word “fanatics” and “jihadis” are used on the front page, possibly intended to stir up Islamophobia in Britain by not providing any further explanation of the terms used or the backgrounds of the individuals.  The link with May’s quote begs the question of what the political fallout will be of this attack, within a week of the general election, and whether any specifics relating to counter-terrorism will be described by politicians over the next three days.


The TimesTIMES

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Massacre in the market  

Author(s): None (Only image on front page)

Analysis: Similar to their coverage of the Westminster attack, The Times chooses to use an image of the three suspects lying on the ground after being shot with a small caption reading “three terrorists lie dead after being shot by police in Borough Market, London. Saturday’s attack was the third in Britain by Islamist extremists in three months.” The image is blurred, communicating the sense of chaos of the scene, with what are presumed to be police officers standing over two of the bodies. The closest man on the floor appears to be wearing something strapped to his torso, which the police had suspected were explosives but were later found to be fake. This image is distinctly different from the other common image used by the press today, which is of a row of armed counter-terrorism police in the capital which instils more of a sense of police control and authority rather than this image which evokes a sense of tragedy and panic.


Front page images from: BBC The Papers ( , The Guardian may be better read at the Guardian website or Pressreader ( or Kiokso (

Reviewed by: Alice Edwards


Friday 2nd June 2017

Friday 2nd June 2017

Papers Reviewed: The Sun, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Times

The Sunsun_June2

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: LEAF IT OUT

Author(s): Tom Newton Dunn (Political editor)

Analysis: The Sun claims that the budget from Jeremy Corbyn’s (The Labour Party Leader) platform will cost families and extra £3500 a year and “blow a £300billion hole in Britain’s finances’. This far from impartial front page headline from The Sun clearly indicates that they are not voting Labour this election. This opinion piece puts forth a number of accusations: that Corbyn proposes “eye-watering” tax hikes (this front page does not reveal who would be affected by these rising taxes); that if elected, the party hopes to write off a number of student loans; and that this budget is just a form of “election bribe” for Corbyn to secure votes. There are no opinions from any sources presented in this text, other than that of the author. While figures are given to illustrate the large sums of money referred to in the text, this is a very good example of how a simple political platform and budget can be interpreted in many ways. While Corbyn proposes writing off a significant amount of student loans, no information is given as to how much money will be saved by Labour’s proposed Tax Transparency and Enforcement Programme, which aims to close tax loopholes for the rich. Political party manifesto’s can be long and hard to read, but in only presenting a limited amount of information, and the opinions of just one author, a completely different and biased presentation of a select amount of facts, aims to convince the reader to take on the political views of the Sun. The full Labour Manifesto for the UK 2017 General Election can be found here:


The Guardianguardian_June2

Topic of article:  US Politics; environment

Headline: Anger at US as Trump rejects climate accord

Author(s): Oliver Milman (Environment reporter); Damian Carrington (Environment editor)

Analysis: Donald Trump has announced that the US will be withdrawing from the historic Paris Climate Agreement, signed in 2015, a significant move as the US is the world’s second largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world. The article contains opinions from numerous sources, and differing views, from Donald Trump himself, to former US president Barack Obama (who signed the agreement in 2015), as well as arguments from an unnamed Whitehouse document claiming the deal had been “signed out of desperation”, and analyses by non-for=profit organisations. While certain Trump supporters claim that climate change is a myth, this issues is not controversial but a proven fact. Almost 200 countries signed the Paris agreement to help tackle greenhouse gas emissions, after more than two decades of failed efforts to come to a consensus. Essentially, after just a few months in office, president Trump has erased more than 20 years of work. While he claims to be acting in the best interests of his “beautiful country”, his denial of climate change jeopardises not just the future of the citizens of the US, but the future generations of the world. Trump claims to be acting in the best interests of the US economy, helping those working in the coal industry for example. He adds in a great line that he was “elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris”. Poetic? For Trump, yes. If you’re looking for something to do this evening, I suggest following this story- as the Mayor of Pittsburgh himself blasts Trump for his actions. This may represent a very sad day for environmental activists and citizens of the world alike. A very worthy front page headline.

The Timesthe_times_750

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: We will use SNP to give us power, says Labour

Author(s):  Francis Elliott (Political Editor); Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor)

Analysis: This article focusses on an in-depth look at what Jeremy Corbyn plans to do in the event of a minority government, as the shadow foreign secretary reveals that that party will look to the Scottish National Party (SNP) MPs for support. So what’s the fuss about a minority government. Essentially if the party that wins the election does not have the majority of seats in parliament, this makes it very hard to pass any bills. All of the other members of parliament (MPs), who would represent other political parties, would, as a group, have more votes than the party in power. This results in policies that need to pass with the majority of votes would stagnate in a so called “hung parliament”. The labour party here proposes that they would focus on the support and votes from SNP MPs to help pass Labour bills if this is the case. While the Conservatives have leapt on these remarks saying that Jeremy Corbyn would “invite the other parties to prop him up as prime minister”, what is not presented on this front page story is the view that this shows a great sign that Corbyn is aiming to team work in the event of a minority government. This article presents a biased view with some facts of what Labour might be planning on doing, with criticisms and opinions from the Tories. What will the Conservative party do in the event of a minority government? What is evident in this article is the growing fear of Conservative Party supporters over the rising support for the Labour Party.


Daily Maildaily_mail_75

Topic of article: Politics


Author(s): Daniel Martin (Policy Editor)

Analysis: A proposed inheritance tax change by the Labour Party for the UK general election would reduce the inheritance tax threshold from £850,000 to £650,000. While Daniel Martin does a great job here of explaining what all of this means, this article is still a biased piece. While half of the front page text is devoted to the details of the tax, the rest is coverage of the Conservative platform and the party’s own beliefs and critiques of the tax. It is ironic that Teresa May’s (the Conservative Party leader and current prime minister) platform claimed to be focussing on “mainstream Britain” in reality, their views on increasing the threshold for inheritance tax to £1million will only seek to help wealthy, upper-middle class families, as few “mainstream” folks could expect such a generous inheritance. While an in depth explanation of the ins and outs of the proposed Labour inheritance tax occurs, the author then points to the “better” Conservative plan to “charge some people more for social care”. By analysing the Labour budget while only presenting vague claims by the Conservative party, the paper attempts to convince the reader to vote Conservative. Just how many British are included in this “some people” claim? We may never know.


Front page images from: Kiokso (

Reviewed by: Anjali Menezes