In text A, sergeant Blackman is represented as being a victim which juxtaposes with the
portrayal in B that he is guilty. This is achieved in A by the ending statement being given to
Blackman (giving his word a sense of finality and truthfulness because it cannot be disputed)
in which he uses the adverb ‘villainously’ to describe the court. ‘Villainously’ is associated
with the semantic field of ‘hero[s] and heroine[s]’, where Blackman is presented as the hero.
In the title, the noun phrase ‘Royal marine’ gives Blackman prestige and an authority to his
actions, suggesting that he did the right thing by shooting the ‘taliban fighter’. Article A is
clearly biased in favour of Blackman’s innocence, particularly because it contains no
quotations from Blackman’s anti-supporters, and instead focuses on the generalised and
perceived popular opinion that ‘everyone wanted [the taliban fighter]dead’.
The noun ‘Taliban’ is also included to elicit fear in the implied audience (supporters of
Blackman) because it reminds people of terrorism. This contrasts with ‘Royal Marine’ and
automatically puts Blackman in a righteous position.
Conversely, Article B implies the opposite, particularly demonstrated in terms of public
opinion of Blackman because he is viewed as ‘some kind of victim’, the quantifier ‘some’ in
this noun phrase adding cynicism. The article attains a somewhat unbiased view in that he is
referred to as ‘guilty’ in the ‘eyes of the law’. In this sense, A and B are similar because their
text producers are attempting to relay their biased views through others, as A showed
support for Blackman through his cheering supporters. Both texts have the same primary
purpose: to appear to report the news impartially, though their secondary purpose betrays
their views about Blackman through their choices of witness.
However article B shows even less support for Blackman: the final word is given to the
Ministry of Defence spokesman who says they ‘respect the court’s decision’ and further
comment would be ‘inappropriate’. At a first glance this statement appears innocuously
impartial, but since the implied audience for B are his opponents, it is likely to be included to
suggest that the court’s decision is wrong and Blackman should be charged guilty; surely if
the spokesperson was supporting Blackman, his response could have been more
personalised. Including this as the final word, the reader will feel uncertainty about the
dropped charges, especially if such an esteemed individual (Ministry of Defence spokesman)
is not completely in support of Blackman’s release.
Though the implied audiences for both texts may be different concerning their views on
Blackman, they are similar because their audiences are represented as readers of internet
articles. Both articles share the sans serif but formal typography and the text is presented in
small paragraphs. This structure follows the genre conventions of having small ‘bites’ of
information and direct language--’Blackman shot an insurgent’--to appeal to the online
community who are busy, multitasking or skim reading quickly.
Claire blackman in text A is represented as an essential part of blackman’s ordeal. She is
portrayed as a loving wife and a ‘heroine’, and the inclusion of her first name, Claire, adds a
sense of familiarity and therefore sympathy for her. Text B, however, neglects to mention her
as much (almost representing her as insignificant), instead focusing more on the trial and the
details of Blackman’s offense. Text B could be represented as being less legitimate than A
as it contains no quotations from Mrs Blackman or anyone else apart from the Ministry of
Defense Spokesperson. However by not including Claire Blackman and focusing on relaying
the facts, B could also be represented as being more trustworthy; people will give quotes
that support their own views.
portrayal in B that he is guilty. This is achieved in A by the ending statement being given to
Blackman (giving his word a sense of finality and truthfulness because it cannot be disputed)
in which he uses the adverb ‘villainously’ to describe the court. ‘Villainously’ is associated
with the semantic field of ‘hero[s] and heroine[s]’, where Blackman is presented as the hero.
In the title, the noun phrase ‘Royal marine’ gives Blackman prestige and an authority to his
actions, suggesting that he did the right thing by shooting the ‘taliban fighter’. Article A is
clearly biased in favour of Blackman’s innocence, particularly because it contains no
quotations from Blackman’s anti-supporters, and instead focuses on the generalised and
perceived popular opinion that ‘everyone wanted [the taliban fighter]dead’.
The noun ‘Taliban’ is also included to elicit fear in the implied audience (supporters of
Blackman) because it reminds people of terrorism. This contrasts with ‘Royal Marine’ and
automatically puts Blackman in a righteous position.
Conversely, Article B implies the opposite, particularly demonstrated in terms of public
opinion of Blackman because he is viewed as ‘some kind of victim’, the quantifier ‘some’ in
this noun phrase adding cynicism. The article attains a somewhat unbiased view in that he is
referred to as ‘guilty’ in the ‘eyes of the law’. In this sense, A and B are similar because their
text producers are attempting to relay their biased views through others, as A showed
support for Blackman through his cheering supporters. Both texts have the same primary
purpose: to appear to report the news impartially, though their secondary purpose betrays
their views about Blackman through their choices of witness.
However article B shows even less support for Blackman: the final word is given to the
Ministry of Defence spokesman who says they ‘respect the court’s decision’ and further
comment would be ‘inappropriate’. At a first glance this statement appears innocuously
impartial, but since the implied audience for B are his opponents, it is likely to be included to
suggest that the court’s decision is wrong and Blackman should be charged guilty; surely if
the spokesperson was supporting Blackman, his response could have been more
personalised. Including this as the final word, the reader will feel uncertainty about the
dropped charges, especially if such an esteemed individual (Ministry of Defence spokesman)
is not completely in support of Blackman’s release.
Though the implied audiences for both texts may be different concerning their views on
Blackman, they are similar because their audiences are represented as readers of internet
articles. Both articles share the sans serif but formal typography and the text is presented in
small paragraphs. This structure follows the genre conventions of having small ‘bites’ of
information and direct language--’Blackman shot an insurgent’--to appeal to the online
community who are busy, multitasking or skim reading quickly.
Claire blackman in text A is represented as an essential part of blackman’s ordeal. She is
portrayed as a loving wife and a ‘heroine’, and the inclusion of her first name, Claire, adds a
sense of familiarity and therefore sympathy for her. Text B, however, neglects to mention her
as much (almost representing her as insignificant), instead focusing more on the trial and the
details of Blackman’s offense. Text B could be represented as being less legitimate than A
as it contains no quotations from Mrs Blackman or anyone else apart from the Ministry of
Defense Spokesperson. However by not including Claire Blackman and focusing on relaying
the facts, B could also be represented as being more trustworthy; people will give quotes
that support their own views.
