Task 1
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
148
On Slideshare
138
From Embeds
10
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 10

http://abbeysfactualpagelayout.blogspot.co.uk 10

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Abbey
  • 2.  The article I chose was from York Press about the Lendal bridge closure and the debate for it. The clarity of this piece of text is clear and easy to understand, the text is basic and straight to the point and has a brief introduction into what has been going on, as this is an article about people’s opinions and not what has been going on, there isn’t a lot of text as to what has been going on it is just a very brief overview. The conciseness of this piece of text there is not much text as it gets straight to the point keeping it simple and is not a long piece of writing however the piece of writing is accurate – it is telling you about what has happened but it isn’t a full story it is just saying people’s opinions for and against the closure of the bridge. This article does present clear information but like I said it isnt a real article it is stating people’s views on the closure and just gives a brief overview into what has happened, but they have been clear on it and haven't been to vague. This article isn't bias in itself as it is stating basic facts but they have people’s opinions in the article which are a mixture of for and against so I don’t think this would apply for this article but when you read into the people’s opinions on things then that will lead you to thinking bias or not bias, most people are in favour and some are against but that is their personal opinion. The language used in this article is clear and formal – it doesn’t use any slang or childish vocabulary. They are reference their sources well – the people giving them their opinions are clearly named and their workplace is named, then it gives you a few lines of what they have said then a link into their full opinion. With this article they aren’t really writing any false information – they are stating facts about what has happened and then they are listing people opinions, they probably have to consider the legal constraints and codes of practice however – for example if they don’t state the facts correctly and say what actually has been going on that is why they have to state correctly what has been going on. Both of these things apply mores towards tabloids – The Mirror for example who make up their own facts about people and make up stories so they can sell their paper, it still applies to broadsheets newspapers but in this case with this interview I don’t think it applies so much.
  • 3.  This article from ‘NewsMax’ is about Nigella Lawson when everyone found out she had been taking drugs while a court case to do with her husband assaulting her was going on, and this article is saying that this drugs case will not prompt the on-going (at the time) investigation.  This article is clear and easy to understand it gets straight to the point, it doesn’t get any insight into what is going on the other court case (a part from a very brief sentence explaining what happened) it is just saying that it would be brought up in the other investigation. It gives information into what has been going on with this ‘drug scandal’ but it comes across like they rush it at first, put in facts and then go back to the beginnings again adding in more information. The conciseness of this text is that they are using as few words as possible as it isnt a very long article but they are trying to cram in lots of facts and information which don’t make it very simple. They are accurate in the information that they are getting and they are presenting what comes across as facts but with these types of articles you never really know what is going on and they could be making up their own ‘facts’ so they can have a story as it isnt ‘factual’ (like the first article) its about a celebrities life which no-one has really any idea into unless they have direct quotes from them – which they don’t and this ties in with avoiding ambiguity as they haven’t been that vague with the information but they could have added more. This article isnt really bias and therefor doesn’t apply as this is about factual information and doesn’t require people’s opinions in it, they are just telling the public what has been going on – they are reporting a story. The language in this article is formal but its on the same lines as any news story which has to use professional language. Evidencing of argument kind of applies – they are reporting a story to the public and have fact after fact, they don’t really have any direct quotes or nigellas side to the story – it’s just being reported to the public. The only thing they really say is that if it was another person – from the public perhaps and this would have happened they would have been arrested for it, but Nigella hasn’t and that is the only thing they really disagree and so does a Conservative MP. They have all their sources labelled – from which they have quotes from and the quote from Nigella in court. As for the Legal constrains and Codes of practice they have to be careful of what they write as there is an on-going court case. They also have to be careful of what the write – not just for the court but for Nigella herself if the tabloids make things to a certain extent she can sue them so this is why they have to watch what the write and just provide the facts.
  • 4.  This is a leaflet about Puppy Farming, it is stating the facts about it and what you should do. The leaflet is clear and they get their point straight across and they give you a lot of information of what it is and what you can do to stop it, they have kept this fairly simple – they have given you point after point and it is set out clearly in paragraph sections. This is very accurate they kept to their point and don’t go off track but the facts are good they are short and simple just getting to the point straight away and they aren’t vague about anything they kept to their point like I said. This leaflet is all about stopping puppy farming and so the leaflet is bias as it is fully against it – I mean I don’t agree with it but they haven’t listed any other points which would be other people’s opinions who maybe for it. The language for this leaflet is simple and just of a set standard it comes across formal as it is a serious matter so they wouldn’t be using any slag for this. They haven’t really evidenced the argument well, they have put all their points across like I said before and they are well against it and haven’t got anyone’s opinion on the matter or anyone who is against it so they haven’t really got a fair argument as they haven’t got two sides to the story, but like I say this is a leaflet about being against the matter so they may not include other people’s opinions. In this leaflet they don’t really need to reference their sources as they don’t have any – its basically a leaflet full of facts with no opinions and so they don’t need to reference where they have got the information from as it is just facts from them, however they have included people such as the RSPCA who you should contact. With all the legal constraints they just have to be careful what they say and not go into too much deal or start blaming companies that do it else they may go to court for things such as harassment etc.