Paradise Papers
The Guardian and Daily Mails home page are both different, as they both take two very different approaches to presenting the media. The Guardian takes a very modern approach to the website with lots of interlocking boxes of different sizes and shapes. Where as the guardian just uses a large list of stories from the top to the bottom. Both have a large focus on pictures as a selling point for the articles and rely on that fact heavily to get people to click on the pages. However where as the daily mail just has a couple of pictures next to the article. The Guardian uses overlays and clipping in order to make the images seem more interested and link to the article they are representing.
The Guardian have written about the event over several days. They have done this because of there capitalist ideas. writing different parts of the story over multiple days means people will have to buy the paper multiple times, this is making the paper more money and getting returning viewers. Returning viewers are all that matter to newspapers as thats where there long term money comes from. This all stems from they know every single person will be interest in whats happening to the queen. As if you don't particularly like the queen you will want to know. If you love the queen you will still want to know. This news story will be the publics interest.
The mirror has one main article in which they talk about what actually happened and what are the paradise papers. They also have smaller articles talking about other elements, but all of the other papers and news outlets do this for any story if any other important information comes out as its in the public interest to have access to all of the facts. This way of focusing the writing in to one article is a broadsheet type thing to do. Having all the details for the readers and using more advanced language and subjects terms.
The independent on the other hand has a series of small posts on each part of the paradise papers. Doing this is very much a tabloid style of posting, writing shorting articles and using more basics terms and writing more story based as it unravels. The total story is written more as chapter based, each post being a new chapter of the story as it unfolds each day.
The Mail Online have posted many different articles with images, that mostly have been used by other papers online. In some of the articles they have used videos to demonstrate what actually is happening. This would of been used as the Mail has published multiple days worth of articles with different focuses on each day. There Online page also loads of posts and articles which were posted as soon as new information comes out they would write about the new information.
The guardian did a similar thing except they split up the main articles in to many smaller articles. This caters to a more tabloid and younger audience. This is because more ad more people are reading in much smaller bits rather than reading one big article, they are reading just the bits that they are interesting. The Guardians online reader base are more like this. That is why they are doing this way.
The Daily Mail, main twitter account @MailOnline, has 2.14M followers on twitter and seem to be very active on their social media, with posting news stories. They seem to have quite a lot of people replaying to them on their twitter but they don't seem to be replying much to other people at least quickly. But on average they seem to post about once an hour with a news story on that twitter account or retweeting from other accounts whether that be the US account of the UK account.
The Guardian has 6.9M followers on twitter. They do seem to much more frequent with their posts posting around every 20 mins for their recent activity that I can see. They also seem to get more replies quicker as a post that is only 33mins old has more replies than I can count realistically. However, they don't really seem to be replying to anyone at all on twitter. They also don't have any other partner accounts that I can see so they aren't retweeting any other accounts tweets. They do however have different sectored account E.G one for a book shop and a dating one.
There is no real branding one either of the 2 twitter feeds. Both seem to very normal in speech to make sure that they appeal to a wider audience.
The Guardian have written about the event over several days. They have done this because of there capitalist ideas. writing different parts of the story over multiple days means people will have to buy the paper multiple times, this is making the paper more money and getting returning viewers. Returning viewers are all that matter to newspapers as thats where there long term money comes from. This all stems from they know every single person will be interest in whats happening to the queen. As if you don't particularly like the queen you will want to know. If you love the queen you will still want to know. This news story will be the publics interest.
The mirror has one main article in which they talk about what actually happened and what are the paradise papers. They also have smaller articles talking about other elements, but all of the other papers and news outlets do this for any story if any other important information comes out as its in the public interest to have access to all of the facts. This way of focusing the writing in to one article is a broadsheet type thing to do. Having all the details for the readers and using more advanced language and subjects terms.
The independent on the other hand has a series of small posts on each part of the paradise papers. Doing this is very much a tabloid style of posting, writing shorting articles and using more basics terms and writing more story based as it unravels. The total story is written more as chapter based, each post being a new chapter of the story as it unfolds each day.
The Mail Online have posted many different articles with images, that mostly have been used by other papers online. In some of the articles they have used videos to demonstrate what actually is happening. This would of been used as the Mail has published multiple days worth of articles with different focuses on each day. There Online page also loads of posts and articles which were posted as soon as new information comes out they would write about the new information.
The guardian did a similar thing except they split up the main articles in to many smaller articles. This caters to a more tabloid and younger audience. This is because more ad more people are reading in much smaller bits rather than reading one big article, they are reading just the bits that they are interesting. The Guardians online reader base are more like this. That is why they are doing this way.
The Daily Mail, main twitter account @MailOnline, has 2.14M followers on twitter and seem to be very active on their social media, with posting news stories. They seem to have quite a lot of people replaying to them on their twitter but they don't seem to be replying much to other people at least quickly. But on average they seem to post about once an hour with a news story on that twitter account or retweeting from other accounts whether that be the US account of the UK account.
The Guardian has 6.9M followers on twitter. They do seem to much more frequent with their posts posting around every 20 mins for their recent activity that I can see. They also seem to get more replies quicker as a post that is only 33mins old has more replies than I can count realistically. However, they don't really seem to be replying to anyone at all on twitter. They also don't have any other partner accounts that I can see so they aren't retweeting any other accounts tweets. They do however have different sectored account E.G one for a book shop and a dating one.
There is no real branding one either of the 2 twitter feeds. Both seem to very normal in speech to make sure that they appeal to a wider audience.
Comments
Post a Comment