Thursday 6th October 2016

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

The Sun

Topic of article: Crime

Headline: Pokemon Murder

Authors: Andy Crick, Mike Sullivan

Aim of the article: The article reports on a murder being possibly mo1tivated by the Pokemon Go game. 

Agenda of the article: The article aims to convince readers immediately that a fight over the Pokemon go game was possibly what caused the murder of a young man in Kent. The paper dubs it “the first UK Killing” for further dramatic effect, despite that it has previously in this year reported on other murders occurring within the UK. It is the intent is to implicate the Pokemon Go game in order to further dramatise the killing of this man. 

 Bias of the article: It isn’t clear how or why the article has implicated the Pokemon Go Game whilst reporting this murder. There are no statements supplied by the police which give evidence for the assertion that an argument over the Pokemon Go game had been the trigger for this murder. 

The Guardian2

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: ‘Change must come’: May consigns Cameron to History

Authors: Heather Stewart, Peter Walker

Aim of the article: The article suggests that May’s Conservative conference speech demonstrates a a difference in direction for the Conservative Government  

Agenda of the article: The article predominantly focuses on the undoubtedly harsh stance towards immigration that May expressed in her speech. It is clear that the writers are most concerned with this stance within May’s speech and is alluding to the bleak future that Britain will have in terms of embracing multiculturalism and engaging in a global world order.  The article represents the opinions of critics of May’s stance on immigration such as Corbyn, demonstrating criticism that she is adding to an increase of xenophobia within the country. Other parts of May’s speech are also drawn attention to, such as her attack on tax-avoiding multinationals (how weirdly left wing) and the individualism that Cameron and Thatcher has fostered, stating that “there is more to life than… self interest”

Bias of the article: May’s speech isn’t likely to be reported in the most unbiased manner within a Guardian article, particularly in the context of rising xenophobia in this country. It could be argued that the article unfairly focuses mostly on her tough stance on immigration whilst her speech covered several points in a bid to appeal ‘moderate’. However, the article did make sure to portray views of critics and proponents of May, alike. Additionally, it is clear that May’s leadership will be mostly evaluated through the lense of how she responds to Brexit. This article therefore does a justice to readers in providing them with a clear picture of how May will respond to Brexit, despite her appeals to appear ‘moderate’, whilst stirring a dangerous anti-immigration stance. 

The Daily Mail3

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: We’re coming after you!

Author(s): James Slack

Aim of the article: May’s speech is discussed as proof of her “fighting for ordinary Britons” 

Agenda of the article: What is mostly pointed out within this article is how Theresa May’s speech reflects an approach within government which would get rid of injustice against “ordinary Britons”. The article largely ignores the anti-immigrant stance, instead focusing on May’s supposed tough stance against multinationals and wealthy elites, whilst promising to help ordinary kids get a better education through grammar schools. 

Bias of the article: The article is so favourable of May and her speech, and makes no effort to question whether her promises will actually be pursued. For example, ensuring that multinationals such as Google stop receiving tax cuts is a really nice policy. Except probably not most convenient at a time when Britain is going for huge economic uncertainty, as there would be a big chance that these multinationals would move away from the UK. The DailyMail barely challenges May and whether her promises will be kept at all. 

The Times4.jpg

Topic of article: Politics

Headline: May takes centre stage in appeal to Labour voters

Authors: Francis Elliot

Aim of the article: Again, May’s speech is the focus of the headline article. 

Agenda of the article: The article covers a large scope of May’s speech, paying particular attention to her warnings at large businesses and their unfair ways. Interestingly, the Times focuses mostly on the economic justice that May promotes within her speech.

Bias of the article: The article covers a lot of points made within May’s speech and so seems initially balanced. However, it’s obvious that the article mostly focuses on the economic justice rhetoric that May’s speech had, with little analysis. Whilst yes, The Times out of the other papers reported the most on what was actually said during the speech, The Times still comes across as biased as it fails to question whether the economic justice is likely to be persued, and other controversial points such as her tough stance on immigration and her distaste for human rights laws regarding troops killing innocent civillians. 

Front page images from:

Reviewed by: Albana Aruqaj


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s