The image used for the headline “British born mother is victim of US massacre” is a small family picture that is cropped in really close to show a head and shoulders shot of this woman who looks very kind and loving. You cannot see the location that she was in or the reason why this picture was taken, for example a family get together. You also can’t see a lot about her personality or what her job was etc but you do get a sense that she is very kind and very loving. This image does tell a bit of the story of the news article but it would have been too graphical to show the full story.
The image used for the headline “BABY AYLAN NO 2” is a very small picture (smaller than the daily express) of two small children in life jackets crying. It is unsure who these children were or if they are actually the children who died but the facial expressions of the children are horrifying as they both look like they are petrified and they look like they are suffering. This image does tell a bit of the story of the news article but it would have been too graphical to show the full story.
The image used for the headline “Priest sacked for coming out on eve of Catholic synod” is a big picture (bigger than the previous newspapers) of a lot of priests sitting in what looks like a church waiting for a service to begin. This picture is very creative in the fact it looks like it was shot using a fish eye lens but to me it doesn’t really tell much of the story of the headline, they may have been better to show the show the priest in question rather than showing a group of priests.
Comparing different images from a broadsheet and newspaper about the French flooding:
The Sun and the Guardian both have very similar images to each other, however the sun have gone for overall pictures that tell a story for example the caravan picture at the very top.
The Guardian on the other hand have got a lot of images and the majority of them do tell a story of what is happening, the Guardian have added a few creative shots, for example the picture of the ground staff at the football pitch at the bottom of the left hand page, brushing the water off the pitch.
I think that having different pictures in the paper keeps the story really fresh as you can get a different prospective of the disaster depending on where you are looking but at the end of the day the choice is very much the editor’s choice and this can be very bias as both the editors would have been looking for different ways to tell the story but also both editors will only have a certain about of space to show these images for example the Sun newspaper only has 6 pictures that are very small in comparison to the Guardian who have 8 pictures and 7/8 pictures are very big and you can see each picture clearly.
There is one image that both papers have that are the same but have been cropped differently, this is the picture of the two cars going over a fence, in the Sun the picture have been cropped so you see a woman looking towards the cars but in the guardian the picture has been cropped so all you can see are the cars rather than seeing the woman also.
I think that just looking at the headlines that the Sun is very one sided and very negative with “Riviera Brits flee as freak floods kill 17” compared to the Guardian who is looking over all and not just focusing one sided this is also negative but sympathetic as well with “ Torrential rain leaves 16 dead and stream of destruction”. I think that the sun is wrong to just focus on the Brits as it wasn’t just the British people holidaying in France that was affected. Also if you look closer at the Sun the headline says “kill 17” but in the actual article it says “killed 16 people” so they are actually bending the truth to get people to read the article which I think is wrong and you should keep to the facts such as what the Guardian have done. The way that the Guardian have gotten someone to look at the article is to have very small writing with what has happened but then used big images to tell a story.