In this assignment I am going to compare two newspaper articles about Princess Diana’s Visit to Sarajevo. The main purpose of Diana’s visit was to meet the victims of landmine. The two articles are from broadsheet newspapers: The Independent and the Daily Telegraph. The Daily Telegraph supports the Royal Family, which means that ‘Royalists’ will read the news in this paper. The Independent is a company with editor’s who are free to write what they will. They are not easily influenced by outside forces.
If the Daily Telegraph was to write an article against the Royal family they will not have a large market, which will most probably put them out of business. The article in the Daily Telegraph is very big in the length of the article. The article covers a whole page of the newspaper; this may show the importance of the article, in that the royal family are important and should be recognised. There is also a picture in the middle of the page surrounded by text, the picture covers about forty percent of the page.
The article in the Independent is very small compared to the article in the Daily Telegraph probably because the editors for the Independent believe that their readers do not care much about the royal family. Even though the article is against the Princess the Editor might have believed that it would have bored the readers or that it is not major news. As the article in the Daily Telegraph is very big the editor has chosen for his article to be in a landscape format so that the headline runs across the top of the page. The headline reads; ‘Princess suffers the emotions of Sarajevo’.
This is suggesting that the princess has been through a lot of pain, grief, damage and self-torture just for the sake of the Bosnians in Sarajevo. The word ‘suffer’ is very emotive in that the princess is suffering for other people. The editor of the Independent has chosen to have the article in a portrait format. As the article is very small the editor has probably made the headline in a large font so that it catches the readers eye in that he or she would carry on reading the article because of the headline that stands out. The headline reads; ‘The shirt was Lauren, the jeans were by Armani …
and the tears flowed right on cue’ the headline shows that the article will be expressing a negative tone towards the Princess. The headline names out very famous designer brands, which she was wearing to her trip to Bosnia, which is a country in poverty. It also states that her tears flowed right on cue, this is suggesting that the Princess of Wales does not cry because she feels emotional but she is acting out her crying for the sake of publicity. The photograph in the Daily Telegraph’s article is surrounded by text and so is Princess Diana of Wales in that gravestones surround her.
Diana is centred in the photograph. We do not know whether the photograph has been cropped, but I suspect that it has because if it hasn’t then Diana would have been very poised but she looks very natural in that picture. Diana is alone in the picture and is looking down at the floor as if she is very pensive, in that she is personally affected by the deaths of those people buried in the graveyard. Her head is bowed, and her hands are clasped as if she is in prayer. She is wearing simple clothing.
This picture shows the natural side of the Princess in that she is in concern for other people, it also shows the main reason for her visit. As we can see this picture is in favour of the Princess in that she is wearing that seems to be simple clothing. The caption underneath the photograph of the Daily Telegraph reads; ‘Resting place: Diana, Princess of Wales visits one of Sarajevo’s three war cemeteries, where she met relatives of some of the victims’. The word victim is very emotive in the fact that Diana met family or friends of those that died in war or due to the mines that have been planted in Sarajevo.
The photograph in the Independent’s article is on a separate page to the article itself because there is another article in the page also about Princess Diana of Wales. The photograph looks very natural, but is very opposite to the one in the Daily Telegraph. Diana is smiling and laughing in this picture, she seems to enjoy being with the French peace making army. Her body language is very flirtatious towards the men that are surrounding her, but she seems to be very calm and in control.
She has her glasses on top of her head in a very relaxed way; both of these pictures must have been taken in the same day even though they both have opposite feelings. She is wearing the same clothes but in this one an extra button seems to be undone on the shirt. She is also holding a bulletproof jacket this can represent that she is probably feeling very insecure and the risks she is taking in the country, but she isn’t showing insecurity in the photograph. There is also the picture of one of the men taking a photograph of the princess.
As she is in the centre of about twelve men she is also centred in the photograph. The photograph shows that the Princess is not doing what she should be in Sarajevo; which is to show respect for the injured or emotionally hurt victims of land mines. She had just been to the cemetery (same clothes); How could she look so happy after that?!! The caption, which was typed underneath the picture of the Independent reads; ‘Snap-happy: French members of the peace keeping force focus on the princess in Sarajevo after her trip highlighting the plight of landmine victims’.
The word or phrase ‘snap-happy’ may relate to that the princess adoring being photographed, though she isn’t supposed to be, she seems to be looking very happy. The caption also goes on to read ‘highlighting the plight of landmine victims’ this is telling the reader that the princess is some what of a hypocrite, she seems to be a very happy woman at that time when the photograph was being taken, when she is in a country which is going through a lot of poverty. Maybe the soldiers should be involved in more important activities rather than meeting Princess Diana of Wales.
The sub heading in the Daily Telegraph reads; ‘As a campaign in the landmine war closes, W F Deedes weighs up the demands of a punishing schedule’. W F Deedes who is the writer of the article has stated that it was a ‘punishing schedule’ for the Princess. The word punishing is very emotive it brings on the feeling that Diana went through a lot of trouble just to help the people of Sarajevo, and that she worked tirelessly. The sub heading in the Independent reads; ‘Kim Sengupta on the final day of Bosnia’s Diana show’. Kim Sengupta who is the writer of the article has typed in the sub heading ‘Bosnia’s Diana show.
This is related to the whole trip which was to give support to the people in Sarajevo was all instead a show which was acted out by the Princess herself, and that the entire trip was just about her. The Daily Telegraph article or the writer has pointed out many things that the Princess did during her stay in Sarajevo, many of these ‘deeds’ are very emotional to the reader. She visited the ‘city with wounds calculated to grieve any heart’. She went to the UN Mine Action Centre and the Norwegian People’s Aid to sit at the treaty negotiations on a mine ban and to do some de-mining work.
This made her sound very intelligent. This alone emphasises the list of tasks that she performed in Sarajevo. During the princess’s visit to one of the cemeteries she met a mother of one of the victims that had died due to an explosion of a landmine. As the Princess could not speak to her all she did was put her arm around this woman’s shoulder to comfort her. This shows how much she cared for people that she did not know at all. It is also very emotive that the Princess did not need an interpreter to communicate with this woman.
‘Some victims accounts of what they saw and felt almost turned the stomach’, this shows that Diana was able to listen to peoples stories without showing any sign of disrespect. In the Independent the writer has pointed out a little variety of the tasks the Princess performed, but Kim Sengupta had added a lot of detail to these paragraphs on what the princess did in Sarajevo. ‘After deciding to make an unscheduled stop to look at graves. Mrs Dragan had gone to place some flowers on her son’s grave and was not expecting the encounter, but according to those present, smiled at the end.
‘ Mrs Dragan was in shock when she saw this woman come up to her with a lot of photographers. She did not know the importance of Diana and who she was. Mrs Dragan had carried on praying on the side of her son’s grave. It could have been very easy for her to tell the Princess to leave her alone, but as she did notice her importance with so many photographers she let the Princess carry on, and at the end she smiled. Probably for relief or even maybe to show that the princess nurtured her. Note: she smiled at the end; she did not feel comfortable with the princess at the beginning.
The tone of the article in the Daily Telegraph is very emotive and very supportive towards the Princess of Wales. The article shows the affectionate side of Diana and that of her importance to this world. The tone of the article in the Independent is the opposite to the Daily Telegraph it is very negative and does not support the princess for what she did in Sarajevo, but it does state in the article one positive statement in the article, which is: ‘The Princess’s trip to Angola as part of her landmine crusade last year was judged to be a huge success.
‘ But it states that the trip to Sarajevo had no importance or attention to the people of Sarajevo and that the Princess did not care much about the people. The trip was overshadowed by her involvements with Dodi al Fayed. The writer of the Daily Telegraph’s article; W F Deedes is very supportive towards the princess. He also included himself in the article: ‘Somewhere is a snapshot taken by the princess with my camera of me using her satellite telephone to communicate with this office.
‘ He is trying to emphasise that he had a good relationship with Diana; if this is true then that might be the reason why he wrote a positive article. The writer of the Independent’s article; Kim Sengupta is very unsupportive towards the Princess. We do not know whether she likes or dislikes the royal family but it was her job to write what she saw in Sarajevo as part of an Independent newspaper company. Both articles are about the same visit, but are very different in size, content, attitude and language.
Both articles have concentrated on the same visit to Sarajevo but one is supportive and the other is unsupportive. I believe that the successful article is the Independent, which was written by Kim Sengupta. I am in support of this article because the newspaper company is not in much bother with who reads its newspapers; it is a very independent company. Even though the article is short it expresses a lot of mixed feelings towards Princess Diana of Wales. It is very strong in language and is very clear in text not literally but in a sense of mind; it is easily understandable and in a lot of detail.