Both the articles were written for newspapers but they are clearly written for a different audience. Item 1 uses short paragraphing with simple wording to make the reader want to read the article, as the short paragraphs appear easy and less of a task to read. Unlike item 2, which contains long paragraphs with difficult words such as assailants is clearly, directed at an intelligent reader. Article 1 uses a headline with a pun much like item 2 does. This is to grab the readers attention and make them interested in the article.
Item 1 uses language, which contrasts such as boxing schoolgirls this, is because the stereotypical schoolgirl would not box i. e. girls slap not punch; this is to grab the readers attention. However item 2 catches the readers interest by using an abstract title (we cannot tell what the article is about from the title) the title is also emphasised by using words that rhyme Wham BAMM, call me Maam. Alliteration is also used in the title this adds impact to it. Both headlines are bold and outstanding so as to catch the eye of a potential reader.
Both the articles have a subheading near the heading illuminating the articles key point. This is to give the reader inspiration of the articles reason and what its about. The subheadings are attention grabbing so as to captivate the reader into reading on. Item 2 begins the article by referring straight to the situation a lady may find herself in if she was in danger and how she defends herself. This is an intriguing way to begin an article and therefore makes the reader yearn to know more.
Item 1 commences in a less exciting manner though the paragraph is short and makes the reader read on as they feel they have not read enough of what has potential to be a thrilling article. Unlike item 2, item 1 is written by a male and is the name is not highlighted. Item 2 highlights the fact that a woman has written the article to make the reader feel a connection with the writer as the article is about women and even though is bound to be biased somehow makes it more reliable as the subject of the article writes it.
Item 1 does not highlight the fact that a male has written it, as it does not want to project an image of being sexist, as the article is disapproving of female boxing anyway. Even though item one appears to be unfair it is objective and it gives both sides of the story and allows the reader to judge whether the matter is acceptable or not. Whereas item 2 is subjective and only gives one side of the story therefore not inviting the reader to have his/her opinion on the issue. Item 1 and 2 have a picture though item 1 has a photograph and item 2 has a cartoon.
Item 1s photograph shows a girl smiling with a trophy and wearing a pair of boxing gloves. This makes the reader want to read the article, as they will be intrigued to know what the picture is about and why she has boxing gloves and a trophy. Item 2s cartoon is effective in the way that to understand it the reader has to look and study it for a long time, once they have worked out what they think it means they will want to read the article to see if they are right. The cartoon is unusual as it is of a lady scaring away a big strong tuff guy.
This makes the reader want to know more about it. Both the articles interview people on their subjects. Article 1 interviews people who have contradicting opinions on the issue though asks important people who are opposed to the issue such as a BMA spokesman and not so significant people who are in favour of the issue such as a lavatory attendant. This will make the reader value the BMA spokesmans outlook far more than the lavatory assistants purely due to their status in life. Unlike article 1, article 2 only questions people who support the articles issue.
This makes the reader concur to the writers point. Article 1 is more effective as an editorial as it is subjective and allows the reader to have an open mind about the topic. The wording is straightforward and easy to read making the reader comfortable to read it. Not like item 2s difficult and complex read. The article has short paragraphs and sentences making it look like an undemanding read with a large picture, which is effortless to understand unlike the complicated cartoon in item 2.