Asyndetic listing, subject specific lexis, rhetorical questions. These are all examples of techniques used by both the Guardian and the Daily Mail. Although they use a range of features in similar ways, there are a few subtle differences.
Both articles provide the audience with additional information however they do this in varying ways. The article from the Guardian provides hyperlinks to other texts featuring extended information on the topic highlighted. This makes it easy for the audience to familiarize themselves with the subject so they fully comprehend the views being presented to them by the Guardian. However the Daily Mail chooses to convey additional facts via statistics and numerical data. For example 'some 57%...' or 'YouGov found that 45%...' This shows they are looking at the situation logically rather than considering emotions and taking into account the trauma causes; this clearly reflects the argument.
The Guardian article features inverted commas throughout and uses them to infer sarcasm or to condescend the views of the opposition. For example when listing the labels that are used to describe the 'migrants', such as: ''displaced people'', ''illegal asylum seekers'' and ''economic migrants''. This linguistic technique has been used to make the opposing left wing views appear more negative. This demonstrates the juxtaposition between their opinions and manipulates the audiences perspective to make the Guardian appear positive and in the right.
No comments:
Post a Comment