Thursday, 22 March 2007

Comparing 5 different news articles online...



The different newspaper online websites I looked at included, The Sun, The Times, The Guardian, The BBC and The Independent.

All three different websites approached the playstation 3 story extremely differently. The BBC had a more official approach, it was extremely formal and was much more 'newsy' with alot of statistics and evidence. The entire story took a much more serious approach purely concentrating on the dangers of selling the computer so late at night in London, aswell as the cost. Although the story did appear on the first page of the web page it was relatively small and not extremely eye catching and so therefore did not draw as much attention as The Times web page.
On The Times web page the article appears at the top of the page which immediately draws attention to the reader, it has a large picture and a bold healine that reads, 'At last playstation 3!'. The Times takes a much more fun and entertaining approach to the story. Once you click onto the main story you are taken onto a seperate page which breaks the the story into 8 different subs stories , whci in turn allows you to choose which angle of the story you would like to look at. This in turn emphasis the inportance of the story, having so much to look at on just one story and making sure it stand out to the reader highlights how important the story to the webpage, as compared to the other web pages The Times seemed to show more dedication to the story. Also The Times was the only web page that also included a downloaded video of how the playstation 3 works, again providing the readers with more information and evidence about the game console, aswell as giving it a more fun and enjoyable approach.
The Independent approached the story extremely different to all the other webpages, while the other web pages had wrote it as hard news The Independent done a feature piece on it. Again this helps engage the reader in a differnt sense. Unlike the others , this specific srticle included alot more questions, being a feature it was also much more direct and engaging for the reader, allowng them to become more involved within the article. However, simialar to The Guardian the article didnt seem to be that important, in The Independant the article was the 12th article down on then front page highlighting the fact that it clearly is not that important compared to the other articles that appear on the page. Also similar to The BBC, The Independent focused more on the negative side of the matter not the entertaining side, as did The Times.
The Guardian didn't look at the story on playstation 3 in as much depth as the other 4 webpages. The article was much shorter and much more difficult to find. Again it looked more iof a negative approach to the matter. Although the article was the 29th one down on the homepage, it did have a picture, which although was extremely small, it did inturn grab my attention and make it slightly more easier to identify compared to the others alongside it.
Lastly The Sun was extremely similar to The Times in the way inwhich it approached the story. The article was much more light hearted and had a more friendly tone. It also included much more comments compared to the others and much more pictures, which again made it more attractive and more easier to read. The article is the 5th article down on the homepage with an image which again helps the article attract the reader immediately.
Overall, it is extremely evident that all the different news online websites approach the playstation 3 story differently, mainly because the other news stories are seen as more important than others.

1 comment:

Jim said...

YOu haven't approached this exercise in quite the way I intended - the idea was to pick a story and look at the way it was covered on five different news sites across the world - not just in the UK

Having said that, this is really interesting. You focus well on the different way different news sites treat the PS3 launch - I think you need to learn to link to the actual stories, not the sites in general... It means people can't go and look at the stories you're talking about...

Also, you need to take more care with your writing/proof reading. Check spelling and punctuation a bit more. Try to avoid repetition in sentences... We can look at this in class.

But an interesting post.
Jim