Topic of article: Entertainment
Author: Mike Hamilton
Headline: I face jail over celeb threesome
Aim of article: The article is informing its readers about certain threats that an unnamed man has received “involving a top entertainer’s partner”.
Agenda of article: Although The Sun and all UK newspapers have received an injunction preventing the publication of details of the private life of the celebrity couple, it is clearly trying to reveal as much as it can by putting this news story on the front page. The image of the person involved is on the front page and only his face is blurred. Descriptive words such as “a top entertainer’s partner” and “by the millionaire star” are also revealing but not explicit.
Bias of article: The feelings of the man that has been threatened with prison are represented here but there is no attempt to clarify if the statements he makes are true. The title itself suggests that he faces jail and appears quite certain however it is only after reading the article that one realises that he has been threatened by it.
Topic of article: Politics
Author: Robert booth (news reporter), Holly Watt (Investigations), David Pegg (Data investigation)
Headline: Cameron finally admits: yes, I benefited from tax-avoiding offshore fund
Aim of article: The aim of the article is to inform its readers that David Cameron has finally admitted that he benefited from a Panama-based offshore trust that was set up by his late father.
Agenda of article: This is enormous news. The fact that David Cameron, the prime minister, has admitted that he personally benefitted from an offshore account is startling and can appear hypocritical. Following the revelation of the Panama paper leak, there has been many casualties including the resignation of Iceland’s prime minister. David Cameron’s recent admission will be shocking to many despite his wealthy background. It is rather disconcerting that “After three days of stalling and four partial statements issued by Downing Street” that Cameron has “confessed” his involvement. The Guardian seems to imply that the extent and scrutiny of Cameron’s tax affairs does not end here. It also mentions that Cameron is unsure whether his inheritance of £300,000 from his father had benefited from tax haven status: “I obviously can’t point to the source of every bit of money and dad’s not around for me to ask questions now” Cameron said.
Bias of article: The Guardian are extensively covering the Panama Papers and they are not concerned about reporting on some of the most powerful and richest in our society. This is a one sided article but it is quite evident why those who avoid taxes, do so. The article emphasises the faux-pas of Downing Street and Cameron when they attempted to explain Cameron’s involvement in offshore funds. However, despite the involvement of world leaders in this scandal, it is unclear why The Guardian choses to specifically focus on the people it has decided to report on. Thus far, there has been very little reporting on western corporations and billionaires, who are the main customers of offshore accounts.
The Daily Mail
Topic of article: Politics
Author: Jason Groves (Deputy Political Editor)
Headline: PM: I DID profit from tax haven
Aim of article: The article is informing its readers about the Prime minister’s recent admission of profiting from tax havens.
Agenda of article: Despite this article playing right into the anti Cameron & Osborne agenda that the Daily Mail is running, it is still very significant news for the British public. The language used: “David Cameron finally admitted..” implies that after the initial revelation of the involvement that his late father had in setting up an offshore account, it was obvious for the Daily Mail and the public that the prime minister must have been involved.
Bias of article: This article does not quote any sources. The Daily Mail suggests that “He also accepted that some of the £300,000 left to him by his father may have come from funds lodged offshore” and that statement does not entirely represent what Cameron actually said. This puts into question the reliability and validity of the article. It also mentions that he gained £19,000 tax-free profit from selling his share but that Cameron insisted he had paid all UK taxes due on his investment. These statements are made without any quotes and it is difficult to assess what is true and what isn’t.
Topic of article: Politics
Author: Lucy Fisher (Senior Political Correspondent), Sam Coates (Deputy Political Editor)
Headline: Cameron: I held shares in offshore tax haven
Aim of article: The article is informing its readers of the recent admission of Cameron holding shares in an offshore tax haven.
Agenda of article: The tone of the article is very matter-of-fact. It clearly states that there has been significant delay in Cameron coming forward and admitting his involvement in his father’s offshore accounts. The potential that Mr Cameron benefitted even more from the offshore account than he already did is highlighted when the article states “Mr Cameron conceded that some of the £300,000 inheritance he received from his father may have from another offshore tax haven”.
Bias of article: The article does relatively well in representing Mr Cameron’s view and also views from Labour MPs. The backlash from Labour MPs is highlighted: “Labour MPs called for the prime minister to resign”. The views of Cameron, which is trying to normalise the situation and attempting to show his innocence to the situation is also at display.
Image from: http://en.kiosko.net/uk/
Reviewed by: Bruno Gnaneswaran