The main points expressed in the guardian article, is the fact that the media of America have failed to supply important news to the Americans, “what we're told about it is little more than semi-official propaganda.” He thinks this has caused Americans to be generally ignorant, of the outside world mainly because they are seldom told of what is going on. Furthermore, he draws a line of distinction of the Americans and America itself. According to Hertsgaard the outside world despises the American government and military. “It is our government, our military, and our corporations that are resented.” He is trying to put forward to the reader that we should think before judging the Americans harshly, because it is the government who is the problem and not the American people themselves. He goes on to elaborate his point that America’s press is “state friendly.” It does not reveal to the Americans all the acts of the government, but rather portrays “the acts of our government, military and corporations in the best possible light.”
Tony Parsons uses several types of language and style to put his message across to his readers. He uses emotive and provocative words and phrases like “mass murder of thousands” to make readers feel overwhelmed with feelings of pity for the victims of 9/11 and to make them inquisitive of why it happened. He uses repetition to reinforce his argument “remember, remember” is repeated several times in the article. He deliberately uses hyperbole, “I would rather be a dog in New York than a prince in Riyadh” to show how he loathes the people responsible for 9/11.Phrases he uses such as “burned alive” create an image in the readers mind. He uses rhetorical questions like “and their nation is to blame for their meticulously planned slaughter?” to make the reader think and fell sympathy for the Americans. Parsons also uses words like “butchered” and “slaughtered” to make the people responsible for the attack look wicked and atrocious. He also shows the contrasts as he compares the reaction in Palestine and America. He states how “Palestinians were dancing in the street” while Americans showed their respect by holding a minute silence for the victims, bringing across the message that America was right morally. He speaks in first person “I love America” to bring his own feelings into the matter, this shows his personal views on America. In his article Tony Parsons uses sarcasm “So a few al-Qaeda tourists got locked without a trial in Camp X-ray? Pass the Kleenex.” This brings across to the readers his deep remorse, towards the people who caused 9/11 and to bring guilt to the people who are supportive to the terrorist and to tell them that 9/11 was a major issue.
The language used in the Hertsgaard article helps us in understanding what the Guardian article is about. He repeats the fact that America is only “ignorant” because of the “state friendly” press to show the innocence of the Americans. He speaks in 3rd person “Americans are not used to drawing the distinction most outsiders do between Americans and America,” to make readers more interested and informed. Unlike the American press, he supplies us with the facts and details about the American government’s activities to show it has also committed terrorist activities. “Last year’s terrorist attacks presented an eerie coincidence to anyone familiar with the history of American foreign policy.” September 11 is also the date in 1973 when a coup encouraged by the US other threw a democratically elected government in Chile. He uses these facts to how that first America is not the innocent party it claims to be and secondly that just as many people died in the American backed coup in 1973 as in the September 11th terrorist attack calling it “deja-vu” He uses contrasts to show how much the Americans were uninformed on the Chile incident. Mark Hertsgaard speaks directly to the readers of his article several times, “I interviewed a wide range of people”
To make them more involved in the article. He also uses complex vocabulary like “Americans suffer daily from pseudo-news that parrots the pronouncements of the powerful and illuminates nothing but the corporate bottom line.” This shows how the newspaper is targeted at reasonably literate readers. Mark Hertsgaard also uses rhetorical questions like “Would outsiders be more forgiving if they knew how little critical information we Americans receive about our government's foreign policy?” to reach the reader’s thoughts.
The mirror article uses large black fonts to write the headline and to attract the reader’s attention. The words “SHAME ON YOU AMERICAN-HATING LIBERALS” draws the reader to the article and emphasises his argument and opinion on the incident of 9/11 In the article, is the photo of the little girl with the phrase “victim: Ruth” makes the readers feel sadness, deep emotions and sorrow for the victims and those innocent. It makes the terrorists look vicious and uncaring for fellow human beings. He uses short paragraphs to make his arguments clear and precise to the targeted readers. At the end of the article he writes the statement “No, do more than remember never forget” in an italic font so it stands out to make the reader stop and dwell upon the situation even after reading the article.
In Hertsgaard’s article the title “Why we still don’t get it one year on” is written in bold black font. This draws the reader to the article as it makes them interested, on Mark Hertsgaard opinion and makes them want to find out the reason for this opinion. Long paragraphs are used to explain the arguments with full meaning. The sentences contain complex words and phrases written for the more illiterate readers. This is classic example of the layout of a broadsheet newspaper. Furthermore he writes the phrase “September 11 is also the date of the us- backed coup against Chile” in bold black writing to make it stand out and draw the reader’s attention. At the end of the article a latest book written by Mark Hertsgaard is mentioned “Why America Fascinates and Infuriates the World” to inform the reader that the matter does not end there but carries on in the book he has written, this shows what he has stated has been deeply researched on and can be trusted by the readers.
In conclusion, the two articles argue points of views from two different people. The tabloid article presents America as innocent victims of Islamic terrorist whilst the broadsheet article puts forward, the argument that Americans are the “victims” of semi-official propaganda, with connections to their countries activities in the outside world. The two articles contemplate on different issues, Parsons talks about the incident of September 11 and its effects on Americans as well as the reasons why America was attacked. On the other hand Hertsgaard concentrates on how the Americans have gone back to living their lives as before the incident, because of the leaders who are not informing them of the full details of America’s activities in the world affairs. He also mentions the media who also fail to challenge their leaders causing the Americans to be ignorant about different matters.
Parsons uses emotive language and different techniques to make his arguments effective and to reinforce his arguments to the readers. Hertsgaard’s language on the other hand is more balanced allowing the reader to decide for themselves on what they believe in the matter.
