There are useful aspects of Source E, e.g. Tyler was a journalist so it was his job to report in vivid detail. This is shown by his use of emotive and detailed language e.g. ‘One little boy had on an old black coat which he held up behind his head, thinking perhaps it might save him from the bullets.’ Tyler supports the view of a ‘massacre’, making this source biased. This is useful because Tyler would not have been biased for no reason. If he saw police shooting innocent protestors then he would want to make his article fully reflect how awful this was. Tyler worked at ‘Drum’, a magazine for black men, which was against apartheid, which would make his article biased. However, there are less useful aspects of Source E. It is definitely written from a subjective and partial viewpoint, so shows only one side of the story. Tyler uses emotive language in an attempt to persuade people how awful the ‘massacre’ was. Tyler was defending protestors and so his article is written from their view point. Overall, this source is still useful despite being unreliable.
There are also useful aspects of Source G, e.g. it is unlikely that a photograph would have been tampered or altered. The source is also factual. It shows crowds fleeing from the police station where police in Saracens are shooting at them. It is first hand evidence as the photographer was there at the time, and as he worked for a magazine it was his job to provide photographs that give a true reflection of events. However, there are also less useful aspects. Photographs are only snapshots and events can change dramatically just a few moments before or after a photograph is taken. The photograph shows only a small section of the crowd, as it is not panoramic and offers only a blinkered view. As you cannot see the entire crowd, it is not useful if you are trying to see how many people were at Sharpeville. Also, although the photograph shows people running, you cannot tell why they are running. Overall, although this source offers only a snapshot of what happened at Sharpeville, it is still useful.
In conclusion, both sources are equally useful as evidence of what happened at Sharpeville. They are both different types of sources so it is impossible for one to be more useful than the other. Together, Sources E and G validate and support each other, making each other more useful. This is because the two sources share the same provenance. Source E could be biased, but Source G corroborates with it, making it more useful. Therefore, sources E and G are most useful when they are put together because then they show a more complete picture of what happened at Sharpeville that day.