Case Studies

Firstly, we see that the two have very different language used for the headline. With the Guardian we see that the queen is being seen as the worse person, and that the poor are victims to it. This is due to the fact that the Guardian are a socialist newspaper, so believe very wealthy people should help the poor - especially in terms of tax. The opposite of this, is the Mail which is a capitalist newspaper and so sees the queen as the victim. She is said to be "dragged" into it which shows how she is reluctant and that people are making her do something against her will. The word dragged is also rather colloquial and so references to how Mail readers are slightly less educated.  On the guardian we see a clear theme of yellow throughout which attracts the readers greatly because of it being so bold and powerful, though the yellow in it also acts as referring to the sun and word "paradise". 

The Guardian are usually very economics based so for them this would be a very hot topic, hence why they have made such long succession of stories on it. Also, tax is always going up so once this has been found out about it makes sense for a socialist newspaper to jump onto something bad about the wealthy. 

We see a "school girl worth £5million"which is a typical Daily mail anchorage because the interest is on the worth of her and not her talent. It also has "girl" included in it which is again something the daily mail would incorporate, maybe emphasising how a girl is worth that such. The way that the girl is used backs up the theory of the male gaze in media aswell as the woman unzipping her dress. Another theory could be the media effect theory in the mail, which is because of how their capitalist views are mainstreamed and so fed into the readers as what is right. 

The plug is large and about "the ultimate party dress" which is something much unlike the Guardian which wouldn't feature a plug like that on the cover. This shows how the people who read it probably care greatly about image and how they look, so party dress diet would appeal to women. 

The splash on the page, is focused on tax which is a hot topic among the wealthy - like many daily mail readers. Another point we see, is that it is clearly biased towards capitalistic views, hence why the queen is seen as the victim. Words like 'controversial' and 'exploiting' are used as negative towards the queen because they obviously see her as being wrong. 

Looking at the guardian, the Uses and Gratifications theory confirms identity via personal belief, educates the reader about the economic story so making the reader feel informed, belief in the accountability being fair for a younger working age reader who pays tax according to the rules. 

Also in the Guardian it incorporates a Berliner effect. The story is presented in sections using boxes but still quality broadsheet context. On the Guardian front page, covering the first release of the story on the Paradise Papers, there is a clear colour theme. The use of a bright and bold colour like yellow makes the story stand out compared to the usual monochrome front cover page; this use of yellow could represent the gold colour of money or the sun in 'paradise'. The colour is repeated throughout the articles within the front page, helping to highlight the main elements and images.

Analysing the language in the Guardian we see the ideology is reflected via the language used. Negative things like "Controversial" and "exploiting" implies moralistic judgment which is much like socialism. 

Looking at the Guardians online we see that what it provides is much mire advanced and in depth than what was shown in the newspapers. We clearly see that the yellow theme is still prominent, but what the Guardian has done is make it into a big case and in a sense exaggerate what it really is about. It states how 'leak reveals secrets of world elite's hidden wealth' which by calling them world elites is making them seem secretive, and stating that their wealth is hidden intrigues people to find out how much is hidden and why. Another difference is that we see the story splits off into many different sectors of it through links. You see there is one from the isle of man and another on tax havens, though it all link back to the wealthy dodging tax and such. We also see how it states this paradise papers investigation is a big job to leaking these tax files with 95 media partners. 

Now, upon looking at the Mail we see a considerable difference from what is on the Guardian. The Mail focuses simply on the main story which is of the queen and how she is a part of this, though with the Guardian they make it into a much larger series of investigations into this 'scandal'. The first line on this states how 'the queen's done nothing wrong' which is obviously what the Mail wants to portray due to the capitalist beliefs, though i believe by not making such a big deal on the whole situation it is in a way the Mail knowing they are in the wrong and so are not trying to make a large case out of it. This is clearly different to the Guardian who know they have a lead on this and so taking advantage of it to ensure they can make it as big of a scandal as possible, to draw more readership. 

Firstly, upon analysing the mirror we see that they also make a rather big story out of the paradise papers - using 4 separate stories to support it. Due to this then, west that they Mirror is really making paradise papers into a topic much like the guardian does, whereas the mail is not intent on making a big deal out of this. Here we see that the mirror is a socialist publication stating that many of the wealthy are 'tax dodge parasites' which is a very harsh description towards these people. Once again aswell, we see that the queen is seen as being in the wrong due to stating it is a 'scandal' what she is doing. 

Looking at the social media aspect of the paradise papers story we see that it seems to be directed into attracting younger people into clicking the story - that is