When it comes to timelines Greene’s article was timelier than Orbe’s. What I mean by that is that Greene’s article came out in 2014, rather than in the early 2000’s like Orbe’s article. You could say that this can correlates to the audiences of the shows. Since Orbe’s academic article was published in the early 2000’s meaning his audience would have been the people who were watching the seasons aired at that time. As for Greene’s journalistic article that was published just this month, his audience might be the viewers of the more recent season featuring the cast’s exes that just joined in on the series. Generally we expect Orbe’s audience to be more mature and academic because of the arguments being presented as well as the format of the paper, which is way more formal stylistic than Greene’s informal journalistic article. You can say that the style of writing has a lot to say about the information being presented. Orbe’s more formal article seems to hold more important and useful information he is trying to get our while Greene’s informal article is just a series of questions being answered by the text’s producer. Greens’s audience wants to know why the text has managed to stay around for so many seasons. This however is not the case for Orbe’s audience. His audience wants an academic view of the TV show where it micro analyzes aspects of the text, such as coding of Black masculinity through the characters and storyline of the TV show. Greene’s audience can expect a quick answer to a question while Orbe’s audience can expect a lengthier and more analyzed paper with narrow focuses on certain aspects of the text. We have compared Orbe’s academic article to Greene’s journalistic article and we came to a few conclusions. We concluded that Orbe’s article was much longer in length compared to Greene’s, because Orbe made an actual argument and backed up them up with concrete evidence, sources, and proof unlike Greene’s article which was simple questions being answered by the text’s producer. The audience between these two articles was different, Orbe’s audience is more mature and academic while Greene’s audience is basically any one who is interested in the show today. However, Greene’s article was timelier than Orbe’s because his paper was written just this month including the new stuff that is going on in the text today. This correlates to what their audience can expect from these papers. Owens audience can expect an academic microanalysis of the characters and the coding of Black masculinity, while Greene’s audience can expect a quick easy to read Q&A with the producer of the text. So in conclusion Orbe's article is more academically challenging in comparison to Greene’s article about MTV’s The Real World.
When it comes to timelines Greene’s article was timelier than Orbe’s. What I mean by that is that Greene’s article came out in 2014, rather than in the early 2000’s like Orbe’s article. You could say that this can correlates to the audiences of the shows. Since Orbe’s academic article was published in the early 2000’s meaning his audience would have been the people who were watching the seasons aired at that time. As for Greene’s journalistic article that was published just this month, his audience might be the viewers of the more recent season featuring the cast’s exes that just joined in on the series. Generally we expect Orbe’s audience to be more mature and academic because of the arguments being presented as well as the format of the paper, which is way more formal stylistic than Greene’s informal journalistic article. You can say that the style of writing has a lot to say about the information being presented. Orbe’s more formal article seems to hold more important and useful information he is trying to get our while Greene’s informal article is just a series of questions being answered by the text’s producer. Greens’s audience wants to know why the text has managed to stay around for so many seasons. This however is not the case for Orbe’s audience. His audience wants an academic view of the TV show where it micro analyzes aspects of the text, such as coding of Black masculinity through the characters and storyline of the TV show. Greene’s audience can expect a quick answer to a question while Orbe’s audience can expect a lengthier and more analyzed paper with narrow focuses on certain aspects of the text. We have compared Orbe’s academic article to Greene’s journalistic article and we came to a few conclusions. We concluded that Orbe’s article was much longer in length compared to Greene’s, because Orbe made an actual argument and backed up them up with concrete evidence, sources, and proof unlike Greene’s article which was simple questions being answered by the text’s producer. The audience between these two articles was different, Orbe’s audience is more mature and academic while Greene’s audience is basically any one who is interested in the show today. However, Greene’s article was timelier than Orbe’s because his paper was written just this month including the new stuff that is going on in the text today. This correlates to what their audience can expect from these papers. Owens audience can expect an academic microanalysis of the characters and the coding of Black masculinity, while Greene’s audience can expect a quick easy to read Q&A with the producer of the text. So in conclusion Orbe's article is more academically challenging in comparison to Greene’s article about MTV’s The Real World.