The target audience for the “Blinking Hell” appeal are similar to the “Adopt-A-Minefield” leaflet.
The “Adopt-A-Minefield” leaflet is unique. The leaflet has holes which go straight through to the end page, which represent how landmines blow holes in people’s lives.
The front of the leaflet show a photograph of a poor, sad child in a circle representing that the child will have his life blown up by a landmine.
When the reader opens up the leaflet, they will see all the text is on the left of the page and the pictures are on the right.
The leaflet has a reply slip at the back of the cover which is not well designed. It does not have a free post envelope compared to the “Sight Savers” leaflet.
The leaflet has pictures of innocent people who have been effected by landmines in small circles, with the name of the country their in at the side of the circle. The leaflet also has a picture of an expert clearing mines with a machine.
The leaflet has an unusual logo which appears like a small flower, which represents peace.
The text appears in paragraphs with each paragraph lasting 2-3 lines. The length is fairly short compared to the “Blinking Hell” leaflet. The font size and style are both normal.
The features I have analysed appeal to the target audience as they have used words suitable for a high reading age such as empower which means allow, distinguish which means decide, maim which means injure and Psychological which means mental and emotional. The writer has used pictures of little children, as my target audience is for someone with a family.
The “Sight Savers” leaflet is well designed. The front and back cover of the leaflet have a shocking picture of a child with barbed wire in his eyes, representing how painful it is to have trachoma. The heading on the cover of the leaflet “Blinking Hell” is in white, bold font. The colour of the leaflet is blue and contrasts with the white font.
The pictures are set out next to the text because when the reader is reading the text, they know exactly what is happening and have a good idea of what they are trying to say.
The reply slip is presented in a excellent way. It is located at the end of the leaflet with an attached free post envelope.
The leaflet has a modified picture of the ointment “Tetracycline” which will cure the disease called trachoma. The writers have shown the ointment bigger than it really is to trick the audience.
The leaflet has a well designed logo. It has a globe representing an eye which is surrounded by the name of the charity “Sight Savers” and its registered charity number.
The features I have analysed appeal to the target audience as the text and pictures are for people with a fairly high reading and people with families.
In the “Adopt-A-Minefield” leaflet, the writer uses many language devices such as personal pronouns, pattern of three, lists and repetition.
In the first few paragraphs the writer uses a lot of personal pronouns such as “you can make a difference” which makes the audience feel guilty, that you can do something to help out other people but are not.
In the last few paragraphs the writer uses the device repetition “landmines blow holes in peoples lives” because the writer does not want the audience to forget that landmines destroy lives.
On the bottom of the page, the writer uses a pattern of three “Clear landmines-help survivors-save lives” because they are trying to get the message across and it is simple with rhythm to it.
On the right side of the leaflet the writer has shown pictures of injured people and the name of their country in a list form because they are trying to show how many people are hurt by landmines all over the world.
In the fourth paragraph the writer writes the fact “became international in 1999” and want the audience to know that they are not a scam, they have been helping around the world for the last 5 years and that they are a registered international charity.
In the leaflet the writer writes an opinion from Paul McCartney saying “It is not brave to leave mines behind” because the writer is trying to tell the audience that this charity actually does help the poor otherwise why would Paul McCartney be a patron.
The tone is very urgent and appealing as they are trying to get the message across “We need your help”.
In the “Blinking Hell” leaflet the writer uses many devices such as repetition, rhetorical questions, pun and personal pronouns.
The writer uses the pun “blinking hell” on the heading of the leaflet because they want the reader to know it is like torture when blinking.
In the first few lines the writer repeats the word “children” a few times. The effect of this is to make sure the audience does not forget.
In the 5th paragraph the writer uses personal pronouns such as “you can” because the writer is trying to tell the audience only you can help, with your donations.
The writer uses a rhetorical question in the last paragraph, “wouldn’t you pay that without hesitation if it were your eyes”. They are trying to convince the audience to place a donation.
The writer uses a fact “we have curing eye diseases in developing countries since 1950”. The writer wants you to know that they are not a scam and that they have been curing eyes from the last 50 years.
The tone is appealing as they keep repeating “we can not cure trachoma without your donations”.
I have found many similarities in both the leaflets. They both used some interesting facts and many language devices. The “Sight Savers” and “Adopt-A-Minefield” charities both attached an reply slip at the back of the cover. They both used many appealing, shocking pictures and their target audience were similar.
There were not that many differences between the two leaflets. The reply slip used by the “Sight Savers” had a free post stamp on it whereas the “Adopt-A-Minefield” did not. Their causes were different and the “Adopt-A-Minefield” layout was very unique as it had holes going through the leaflet to the end page.
The leaflet I found most effective for the intended audience was the “Blinking Hell” leaflet since the intended audience were people with a fairly high reading age and in the “Adopt-A-Minefield” leaflet there was not enough information about the cause. They had less writing and more pictures whereas the “Blinking Hell” leaflet had a lot of information about the cause, less pictures and the layout was much better.
By Gavinder Joahl