The headline in The Times, “COMMONS INQUIRY TO ASK WHO PICKS HARRY’S ADVISERS”, is a lot smaller than in the Sun. This shows that it’s not the title that will sell the paper it’s the story inside. There is only one title and no subheadings. The Times just states the facts and doesn’t drag the story out. It gets straight to the point and focuses on facts not opinions. The title doesn’t offend the royals, unlike The Sun where they are called Nazis. “Commons inquiry to ask who picks Harry’s advisers” This is reflected by the fact that The Times supports the royal family. Instead the question is about the Advisors and who picks them. No where in the article does it say who picks the advisors and so maybe this ties in with The Times supporting the royals.
The story is a follow up story to the main one and so the paper is presuming you know about the story and so it can save some time explaining the story before. “The advisers surrounding Prince William and Prince Harry are to be subject of an inquiry next month by a House of Commons committee.” The title is brief, doesn’t give views like The Sun where they tell you what to think and it doesn’t give any of the story away and this makes readers want to read on and find out more.
Seven eighths of The Sun’s article is pictures. This means that they are presuming their readers don’t want to read much text. The pictures catch more eyes and draw more people in. By adding more pictures in their papers the Sun can sell more just by interesting people with a picture. The picture of Harry and the butler in a farm is superimposed and follows the non serious tone of the article. They make Harry look even more like a drunken teenager by making the butler hold a pint of beer. The picture follows the story in the article but it isn’t real. This makes me ask how much of the story is true. The smaller picture of Harry at the party dressed as in a Nazi uniform is from a previous article and so again The Sun isn’t presuming knowledge of it’s readers and has to recap the previous story again. The picture is of Harry holding a glass of beer and a cigarette and this just makes Harry seem a lot worse than he is. The article leaves the main story of the Nazi costume and starts to show Harry in other lights like a drunken and a smoker. This image was created by the Sun in the first place, so by creating an image and making it look as if someone else is creating it, allows The Sun to manipulate its readers in to believing what the article says. Underneath this picture the subheading is “Offensive..Harry in fancy dress gear” Here the Sun is telling you what you already know and by using the word offensive makes him sound a lot worse than he is.
There is only one picture in The Times article and it only takes up one sixth of the article. The picture doesn’t give anything about the story away apart from its involvement with the royal family. The look on the queen’s face in the picture sets the tone for the article and shows that the rest of the royal family don’t approve of this behaviour just as much as anyone else. The picture would have come from another story about the royal family and is being used in this article because it has reference to the story and shows how the royals really feel about the Nazi costume. It shows them is a better light. Underneath the picture there is an anchorage. (The small piece of writing underneath the picture) “A swastika at Balmoral could further embarrass for the queen.” The anchorage leads you on to another part of the story which you don’t know about and this will make more people read the article to find out about it.
The layout of The Sun article is around seven eighths picture and one eighth writing. It is set out in an informal way and has different style writings and different size pictures throughout the article. There are different stories and a lot of different headlines to draw readers in. The pictures and headlines are the main focuses of this article they sell the paper and draw readers in. The pictures say a lot about the story and so only a little bit of text is needed to reinforce what can be seen. On one side of the article there is a poll. This poll is very important because it is the word of the people and the Sun represents the word of the people and so this backs up the reputation of the newspaper. In the poll the questions start off as being related to the story “It was extremely bad taste of Harry to dress up as a Nazi” but then go on to have nothing to do with the story on Prince Harry and they involve more of the royal family. “Who is your favourite member of the royal family?” The poll makes the readers feel more apart of the story even if they didn’t take part in the poll. It says in the poll “Three quarters of Britons thinks…” This may lead you to believe that many people have taken part in this and so you feel more important but at the bottom in very small print it says “Populous interviewed a random selection of 1,503 people aged 18 and over” This makes you ask, how are these people?. At the end of the article there is a bit that leads you on to other parts of the paper. This draws readers in to the paper and hopefully will read more as they pass it.
The Times only has one picture and it only takes up one sixth of the article. The article itself is set in to three columns and has formal writing. All the text is the same and there are no sub headings to break the story up. At the end of the article there is also a bit of writing that draws you in to the paper so that you will read more “Debate, page 56” This means that people can read about different views on the matter unlike the article itself where no views are given and decisions are left open to you.
The Sun uses a lot of colloquial language in its story. “Harry was wearing a Nazi uniform to a pal’s fancy dress party” Colloquial language is chatty and informal language and makes the readers feel more part of the story and feel as if they know more about it. There are no confusing words and so it’s accessible to everyone and can attract more readers. The writer is able to give us a very clear image of Harry “Rowdy Royal” and “Offensive..Harry” By using the words Rowdy and Offensive we get an image of Harry that may not be a good one but we are forced in to thinking this because this is what we are given. The readers are told what to think and not given a chance to make their own decisions. “Charles decided a spot of hard work was the best way of keeping him out of trouble.” The Sun also is very good at manipulating the way we think and getting us on their side. “Nazi Harry” This is a great example of this. We know that Harry isn’t a Nazi but by calling him one it makes him sound a lot worse than he is. This makes us feel as if he is in the wrong and will agree with The Sun when they say he stupid and deservers what he gets. Multiple puns are used in the article and this sets the tone of the article as a jokey, not very serious article. “Harry, more used to chatting up lady muck than shovelling muck” Its just a way that the paper can make fun of him and sell some papers with this story. The Sun will continue to publish a story until it stops selling newspapers. The paper then goes in to a more serious tone when they talk about the Farm itself where Harry will work and what it sells and does. This lowers the tone a bit and makes you think about other things as well as the article about Harry.
The Times has a much more formal Tone to it. It states the facts and uses much more complicated language than the Sun. “We will be entitled to ask, as this income goes to the crown with various tax exemptions” This is also presuming that your readers will know what your talking about. Unlike The Sun The Times lets you answer your own questions and doesn’t give you only one side of the argument it gives you a balanced view. “Are the recruitment procedures fair and open?” This is a rhetorical question and also leaves views open for the readers to decide what to believe. The Times talk about a wider range of things such as the cost of recruitment and the inquiry itself and its outcome. It also has quotes from named people how are people from government. “Ian Davidson, the MP for Glasgow…”
Because The Times is pro Royals they don’t attack or blame Harry they blame the advisors for not doing their jobs. “The all-party committee will ask Sir Michael about the recruitment of advisors”. There are much more political aspects in the article that make it seem a lot more involved in the story and know about its background. You feel more inclined to read it because they have more evidence and research in the article to answer more of your questions. “The Duchy of Cornwall income funds the Prince of Wales.” At the beginning of the article The Times answers a lot of questions including who “The advisors surrounding Prince William and Prince Harry.”, what “Subject of an inquiry.”, when “next month.”, why (Presumption that you know from previous article) and where? “House of commons” By answering these questions straight away you get the facts and are able to make your own decisions on what to think. In the second half of the article the story leads on to another story where you find out more facts about the swastika and how a symbol at Balmoral that is similar to the swastika could cause even more embarrassment. “The war memorial just outside the gates of the highland holiday home is decorated with the new offensive mark” but because The Times is pro royal they back this accusation up with an excuse and a reason to this symbol. “The symbol stood for goodwill and wellbeing before it was hijacked by the Nazis.” In the main article the Times refers to The Sun and its article and pictures. By saying that you can see this picture in The Sun it is advertising its sister paper and getting more people to bye it and therefore getting more money.
I think that The Sun is a good paper if you just want to get an outline of a story and don’t know too much about the story in the first place. The Times is a much more sophisticated paper that is for people how know about the story and are looking for a lot more detailed analysis of a story. In my opinion the Times is a better paper to buy. It allows you to make your own decisions and so you’re more likely to come to a better well educated answer because you have more information and more truthful facts that you can rely on.
