Comparing two newspaper articles

The “Mail on Sunday” article about David Beckham is more for young adults aged from about 18-25 because it uses words related more to that age group like “Ecstasy,” it also is for quite intelligent people like “Conjured.” However even though it does use some complex vocabulary it also has quite simple language to like “Celebrated.” The article is also more for people who follow football because it says

“A Trademark 25-yard free-kick”

This is relevant because if you didn’t follow football you may not know whom they were talking about. The “Independent” however is for more intellectual people because it doesn’t say very much about the game it has more stats and interviews and also how they think England will do in the World cup, which means they had to use lots of opinions like

“England could not be guaranteed to discomfort a team of waiter from a sushi bar”

The Writer was also trying to use a humorous but sarcastic tone for this sentence too this was relevant because he was trying to mock England a bit about how bad they played. This is also trying to suggest that if they played like they did against Greece they would have no chance of winning the World cup.

The “Mail on Sunday” was very biased towards England because they only managed to get a draw from the game but because they used words like “Triumphantly” it sounds like the played really well and won the game easily. The article also doesn’t talk very much about Greece and when it does its only about when David Beckham put the ball into the back of there net. In the “Independent” though there is a more balanced view of England because it does say did well to get into the World cup but it also says about England will have to play a lot better to win the World cup by saying things like

“ Plainly Eriksson still has much work to do before England can comfortably move in the polished company such as the World Champions.”

Both of the papers use interviews in their articles however they are both used for different purposes. The “Mail on Sunday” uses an interview with David Beckham to show how it was David Beckham who got England through to the world cup. In the “Independent” though it only has very small parts of interviews and also quotes like when it has Eriksson speaking to the squad saying

“It is too early to cry. There are 45 minutes left”

Apart from this little bit about Eriksson there is also more about him so this article is more about a team effort and not just David Beckham.

Both of the articles also have a very different way of doing the articles because in the “Mail on Sunday” at the end of each sentence it goes onto a new paragraph, which gives it a very simple structure. However in the “Independent” the paragraphs are a lot longer and they have more sentences in each paragraph, which makes it more complex for my intelligent people. The “Mail on Sunday” also uses more words that are related to football like “Qualifying” and “Booked” which suggests that this is more for people who follow sport and football. In the “Independent” though it uses more complex vocabulary for more intellectual people like “Threadbare” and “Deficiencies,” which shows that the paper is more for clever people like business people and upper class. This article also suggests that it is for Doctors and nurses because it uses medical terms like “Appointment” and “Deficiencies.”  

Overall from summing each of the articles up I like the “Independent” more because even though it does not have a really eye catching picture in it to attract peoples attention it tells you more about England like how Paul Scholes and Steven Gerrard had a bad game and not just about David Beckham like on the “Mail on Sunday.” Also it is not biased towards England, even though I like England I don’t think that they should be praised loads for getting into the World cup because they didn’t play very well and Greece gave them a good fight.