Comparing the Language of Today to That of 1944
- Submitted by: chrsely
- Views: 790
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 07/13/2010 12:10 PM
- Pages: 5
- Report this Essay
Comparing the language of today to that of 1944.
For this assignment we are comparing the text from stories on two front pages of the Daily Mail newspaper, both carrying stories related around the important war of the day.
The present-day text coming from the Daily Mail dated Thursday November 26th 2009 and the historical text from the much earlier Thursday 20th January 1944.
On first glance at the papers themselves we can see that the modern day Daily Mail
has evolved into a tabloid format of the paper, whereas the 1944 edition is still in the
original Broadsheet format. We can see from reading the two papers that the
Broadsheet format, being the traditional home of the serious newspapers including The
Times, The Telegraph and The Financial Times, deliver their stories in a more formal
format compared to the sensationalising and more gossipy delivery of the popular
tabloids these include The Sun, The Star and The Mirror. So why change format and
put itself out as a tabloid? This is possibly due to the way people perceived the
newspaper at the time, in 1944 the newspaper was a serious means of communicating
information, many people were inclined to believe what was in the papers simply
because “it was in the papers” whereas today a lot of stories and headlines are just
dismissed as rumour, lies or just “paper talk”. A reflection of todays society where
headlines do not have to be true just attention grabbing.
Reading the stories we can feel a definite difference in the persuasiveness of the
language used. The 1944 paper is very positive and upbeat whereas the 2009 paper
uses its text to show a negative side. This is again possibly a reflection of todays society
in the “blame culture” of today, where everyone is looking for someone to blame,
compared to the 1944 papers “we are all in this together” and “stiff upper lip” team spirit nature.
The text in both papers is formal in style more so in the 1944...
For this assignment we are comparing the text from stories on two front pages of the Daily Mail newspaper, both carrying stories related around the important war of the day.
The present-day text coming from the Daily Mail dated Thursday November 26th 2009 and the historical text from the much earlier Thursday 20th January 1944.
On first glance at the papers themselves we can see that the modern day Daily Mail
has evolved into a tabloid format of the paper, whereas the 1944 edition is still in the
original Broadsheet format. We can see from reading the two papers that the
Broadsheet format, being the traditional home of the serious newspapers including The
Times, The Telegraph and The Financial Times, deliver their stories in a more formal
format compared to the sensationalising and more gossipy delivery of the popular
tabloids these include The Sun, The Star and The Mirror. So why change format and
put itself out as a tabloid? This is possibly due to the way people perceived the
newspaper at the time, in 1944 the newspaper was a serious means of communicating
information, many people were inclined to believe what was in the papers simply
because “it was in the papers” whereas today a lot of stories and headlines are just
dismissed as rumour, lies or just “paper talk”. A reflection of todays society where
headlines do not have to be true just attention grabbing.
Reading the stories we can feel a definite difference in the persuasiveness of the
language used. The 1944 paper is very positive and upbeat whereas the 2009 paper
uses its text to show a negative side. This is again possibly a reflection of todays society
in the “blame culture” of today, where everyone is looking for someone to blame,
compared to the 1944 papers “we are all in this together” and “stiff upper lip” team spirit nature.
The text in both papers is formal in style more so in the 1944...