Both of the articles cover the capture of the terror suspects who supposedly committed the London train bombings. Both papers comment on the bombing from their respective point of views. The issue of terrorism has been in the story since the bombing of the twin towers in New York in 1993. This was the beginning of the War on Terrorism and on the 11th September 2001, two separate passenger airliners were flown into the twin towers, the pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania. The Islamic militant group Al-Qaeda and was seen by the Americans as an act of terrorism and this was the start of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The London bombings on the 21st July 2005 were also claimed by Al-Qaeda and were an act of terrorism to bring carnage to Landon. The two articles were published on the same day, and are both about the same story. The whole articles show bias viewpoint from both points of view. They both tell the story of the suspects by using their own extremely different terminology. The stories both show the different points of view. One article may be rendered as a nationalist article and one may be seen as a left-of-centre publication of events.
The Sun shows its thoughts of the bombings; it talks about the events leading up to the capture and describes how the SAS swooped the flat in Notting Hill. It also shows the mug shots of the suspects and also talks about the suspect that was captured in Rome. They have obtained the security images the show the suspects on the buses and in the train stations. It has witness reports and large headline that says Caught like Rats in a Trap and Got the Bastards. The Guardian shows a largely conservative view on the subject with formal language and very simple headlines.
The same story is depicted in the guardian but there are less witness reports and more factual detail. The article tells about the raids in Rome and London after the close analysis of the security footage and the secret information. The language used in both texts is completely contradictory, one is completely colloquial and one is very formal. This can be seen from the diversity between the two headlines. The Suns headline reads Got the Bastards-Moment Bomb Suspects Surrendered; The Guardians headline is very paradoxical as it reads Entire alleged bomb ring held after raids in London and Rome.
There is a clear difference between the tabloid and broadsheet styles and formats. The first key issue is the importance of the front page, as The Sun has an important Page 3 to uphold it cannot publish many things until the fourth page. This means that to attract a reader they must advertise everything on the front page by using large headlines and even larger photographs. In this case it has used a large image of a naked suspect who was reprimanded outside his flat in central London.
However The Guardian is a clear broadsheet newspaper with simple headlines, and because it does not have to publish many pieces of writing inside the paper it can write most of the article on the front page and still is able to publicise other stories. The use of language in The Sun is very colloquial, it has a humorous tone which tries to judge the suspects with a headline that is a simile referring to the capture of the suspect was like being Caught like rats in a trap. The Sun says that security chiefs were jubilant after police captured the suspects.
This shows the police in a bad light as it makes them look like they have already passed a verdict on the five suspected bombers. Although the article does show some factual detail, it sources can be questioned. The exact details of the raid and the detainees were published and this may cause problems for The Sun as it may lead them into legal debates over libel. The photographs in the article show, what appears to be four of the five men on buses in central London; this identification of people shows that The Sun have accused the five suspects without a legal trial.
The maps of the locations of the arrests show how grand a scale the raids were and the Suns emphasis that one suspect went to Rome increases the thought that they are guilty. The Sun shows clear bias in most of its text, this underlines its fascist thoughts and its nationalism. The form of the emotive language can be seen in glimpses in the text; the use of emotive language can be found throughout the article in The Sun. it is used as a way of persuading the reader into believing what they are writing.
This can be seen as a form of manipulation. The Guardian view of the events is very conservative. It gives factual information about the raids and does nor show bias in great substance. However it dos stereotype the suspects as would-be killers even though they had been caught the day before and had not undergone a trial. It describes that the officers dressed in overalls and wearing black balaclavas descended on the scene to raid the flats and capture the suspected 7/11 bombers.
It has sources in high places like the Italian interior minister and officers for New Scotland Yard. The Guardian provides a purely factual account of the event during and after the arrests. It does not use emotive language and most of its language is formal. It only describes the bombers as suspects but The Sun describes them as Bastards. It does not show photographs of the bombers faces while being captured and only shows photos that were obtained from CCTV security footage. It uses an emotive piece of writing about the bombings from a victims point of view.
This shows that The Guardian although not judging the suspects in the main article, they make the reader believe that the bombing were wrong and the people who have done it should be punished. I think that The Sun shows biased views on the raids and have judged the suspects before the trail. The Guardian on the other hand is a more responsible article. It covers a large scale audience because it includes good, necessary factual information to give a clear picture. The consequences of The Suns article may lead them to be sued for libel and this also may lead to parliamentary act by government on how these stories should be presented.
The Guardians depiction of the story may not have any consequences because it does not defame anyone in its article. Based on these articles I would say that the five suspects are guilty because of the capture of Hussein Osman who was tracked to Rome. It brings up the question, why was he hiding if he did not do anything? Other people may hold different views mainly because of the way The Sun has portrayed the bomb suspects; if you call them Bastards then it may lead to readers of broadsheet newspapers or left wing supporters to think otherwise.