The styles of writing and language of these two pieces of journalism are very different, mainly because they have different readers. The first article written as a heroic piece of journalism, it glorifies the survival of Tony Bullimore. This is achieved by the writer using words that transmit tension to the reader. “…he described the horrific conditions that he had endured.” “Faced with danger…” The second article is a breath-taking experience happening to someone then writing his feelings, emotions and the actual experience. The style of writing is linked to the media in which its published.
The tone, initial ideas, writing styles, structure contributes to give out big contrasts between the two Medias. The first article has a big picture of the rescue, with huge waves; the picture is near the centre of the page, making it a noticeable picture. The second article doesn’t have any illustration of any kind but using long and descriptive sentences he can produce a better replica of how really conditions were like.
Description like “total darkness”, “metal sheet covers the window”, “thin foam mattress” “…my candle splutters…” creates the atmosphere of the prisoner’s cell.
The titles and sub-headings are also different, the first the title is “Thank God-it’s a miracle” shows how the article portrays the ordeal as a miraculous escape. The attitude of the piece is that of a sensatationalist reporting. The sub-headings follow the same style and they all start with “The” which suggests how big this rescue is, its not just a rescue its “The Rescue”. On the other hand “The light in my Darkness”, the title of the second article tells how different the two are. There is an imagery in the title, its an antithesis, this shows that the readers of that media should be a bit more developed intellectually.
The broadsheet uses a persuasive, survival and heroic language; by this I mean that during the whole article its always glorifying Bullimore. This language is a constant build-up of Bullimore’s ordeal. To make the article more reliable and believable the reporter uses the opinions of clinical specialists like Dr Howard Oakley of the institute of Naval Medicine, the author uses quotes of these specialists to make it more believable. As I have said before the article only glorifies him isn’t true, there is a human side of the story and a side of some luck and not just professionalism. Using Bullimore s own words makes the article even more real, it creates the human side of the story.
The second article uses a more emotional and descriptive type of language, the author of the second article wants to show his suffering. He is always describing his state of mind and his environment. “I have been interrogated, beaten and endured a mock execution” shows just how much he suffers. Some readers may find repulsive the constant glorification of the hostage.
The tense also plays a role in the way the articles make there points. In the first article it uses the past tense “I had to find myself a spot as high as possible…”, “I took a few deep breaths”, I started shouting”, all this add to the feeling that its happened but thank god its over. This is nothing like the second article because the second article uses the present tense “I can’t see”, “I am being held”, “I climbed under a blanket” all this creates an unavoidable atmosphere of fear and trauma. It makes the reader aware that he probably is still passing the horrendous experience.
To finish off the layout is another very important aspect that we must comment on, at a first glance the differences are evident, the titles, sub-titles, images all that the first has but the second only has a significant title. The article in “The Independent” has the typical layout of that of a broadsheet article. Many paragraphs and columns all are used to make the article more reader friendly and more eye-catching. These things must be used in a broadsheet so that its successful. The other article uses only a large title and a sub-title underneath it then just consists of paragraphs and prose no quotes or images like the first article. It has nothing that is eye-catching for the reader. This means that even without the eye-catching factors it is still read.
