9/11 Similarities And Differences

While both the article by Thompson (2011) and the report by Pullen (2001) share similarities and report on the same incident, the styles of the two articles differ greatly. Thompson uses dramatic phrases such as, “Boom! Boom! Just like that” (Thompson, 2011), to pique the interest of the reader. Similarly, Pullen makes use of emotionally loaded words like “flung” and “distraught” while reporting on the involvement of the Army Reserve Forces in the rescue operations following 9/11. This demonstrates the media’s use of emotive language to engage the reader.

Despite their similarities, Thompson’s account is pervaded with opinion while Pullen concentrates on a factual account of what occurred at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Thompson’s article represents a field of journalism that unapologetically reports news from a subject point of view. Pullen, on the other hand, appears to recount the events as they occurred. However, his tone betrays the fact that he believes that the Reserve Army Forces acted admirably. The differences between the articles emphasise the fine line between objective reporting and opinionated reporting. No journalist or writer can be truly objective, however, there is a vast difference between Thompson’s article – which is written from the first person perspective and includes some of his predictions for events after 9/11 – and Pullen’s article – which includes numerous verifiable facts and is written in the third person.
This can be done by asking some simple questions. “Can I verify this statement? Is this statement a statement of opinion (qualitative) or of fact (quantitative)? Do other sources confirm these events or facts?” This will enable the reader to differentiate between the fictitious or subjective sections of the text and the actual