Layout is an important clue as to the bias and audience at which the article is aimed at. Article one at first glance is made up of a third headline, a third picture and the final third, the written section, in almost equal proportions. The headline draws attention to itself, It is written in very bold and uncomplicated text. It reads ' Dodging lessons at Hi-DI-Hi School'. It is quite obviously questioning the morals of the venture and almost questioning its value. A pun is used to undermine the thinking behind the move by the education system and almost poking fun at it. The picture in the Daily Mail shows a group of school children playing darts and sitting around a table doing nothing, almost portraying the scene that the students are just having an easy time instead of learning. The caption beneath the picture reads " Darts and Arithmetic . . . but does it add up to education ". Once again the newspaper is questioning this venture.
Article one is aimed at very broad audience. It's simplistic enough to reach a wider audience, with short simple facts about the situation. But crams in enough information in such a way to meet the needs of a more intellectual person(s).
In Article one the language is very simplistic, the sentences don't exceed 18 words, and the longest word is about seven letters long. Again, this is because it has to be understood by a lower class person. You don't need to have a large attention span to read it and the first paragraph usually gives a broad outline of the article.
The tone of the advert makes the whole content of the article sound like a joke. For example, " No marks at all for the local education authorities who waste public funds on such tom foolery". Maybe implying that this whole scheme is to fill up gaps at Butlins rather than being an educational holiday.
I believe that article one is biased against the holiday camp because of the political party the newspaper supports, or because of the owner's personal opinion.
Nobody has been interviewed in article one. This is probably because the people they interviewed didn't have the same opinion as the people at the Daily Mail.
Article one has been written to make parents/people aware that public funds are being wasted on " such tomfoolery " and that this is not the way that children should be taught because it's fun.
Article two differs greatly in layout compared to article one I layout. Article two has a small headline which does not drag attention away from the rest of the text, the headline states the basic idea of the article, which reads " Pupils play to learn at Butlins ", this headline does not include a pun or a bias twitch which article one's did. Accompanying the headline is a small photograph, which illustrates the situation and a small caption to explain what is happening. Also on the page is a large article in small print, with the writer and writer's position stated, which did not appear on article one.
This article (2) is aimed towards a more cerebral type of citizen. This is because of the language. The language and word structure in article two is much more intellectually based, for example " As it happens an 11.000-bed out-of-season holiday camp is a slightly incongruous place for a school trip". The words and sentences are longer and more complicated, the sentences also flow more easily. Article two goes into great detail on the situation in hand, it interviews many people and gives you more facts than you can handle.
The tone of article two is a lot more serious and informative, it states how the children's beds were wet and smelled. E.g. "At first she says the children were out into a damp old chalets on the periphery of the camp were the beds were wet and cold" . Which brings the article to another level of seriousness, because the question crosses your mind that. Why are Butlins hosting such an event when there not even prepared to take on five hundred students?
This article does not seem to be biased at all. It gives both sides of the argument a fare trial and leaves the article open-ended so you can make your own decision.
This article interviews many people from teachers to students, of which they get a mixed response. Some people thought it was a good idea that wasn't going to take off, others said it was nothing but problems from the second they got there. Some said there were plenty of resources, others said that there was none.
In this particular article there is no definite message. As I stated earlier it is left remarkably wide open for your own judgement.
In my opinion I prefer the independent to the Daily Mail because it's more to the point. It doesn't mess around with puns or large flashy pictures, it gets to the point in great detail. It also gives lots of opinions from lots of angles.
By Mohammed Islam
