Comparing The Sun and The Times

The Sun and The Times are extremely different newspapers, even if they post articles of exactly the same story; they're likely to take incredibly opposite routes to get there. This is primarily because of how different the audience is for both papers, the editors design the articles with the eyes of their target audience in mind. They take into account how they might attract the reader into the stories.

Let's take a look firstly at how they both present articles on the U.S elections:



Here is the page in The Times, the main things to notice are the headings that are used and the statistics visible at the top of the left page. Notice also the manner in which the blocks of text are laid out all down the page, it's quite a daunting amount of text upon first glance. But with a story of this magnitude, The mature readers of the times would come to expect this level of article.
Let's now compare this to an article from The Sun:



You can immediately notice a stark difference in the way the page is structured, notice firstly how the page is no longer covered in text. The blocks of text are neatly packed into a box and would be easy to follow. The giant title of the article is also positioned near the centre of the page. You can assume from this that the audience is younger or even of a lesser attention span, the title sums up the entire article where as the statistical information in The Times was given in an informative chart. The title is also in a far bolder font, making it almost impossible to not notice. The conventions that the Sun uses to create an article follows a much more simple and clear approach. It technically uses a brighter colour code with larger photos and larger text, it also chases a symbolic design (Where the signifier resembles the signified) because of the use of photos like the Jennifer Lopez one. It tries to appease to a pop culture audience.

The differences in photos are also notable, The Times uses a very topical and relevant photo. It shows Hilary in a conference hall seemingly whispering into somebody's ear, you could assume from this that it's trying to convey a bit of mystery around her as a character; especially considering the contents of the article and how it explains the whole FBI scenario.

Now if you look at the photo for The Sun, it's a giant photo of Jennifer Lopez. The purpose of this is clearly because the article makes reference to how Jennifer is backing Hilary, it's making it clear that she's a supporter of Hilary. So why is it more important than a photo of Hilary? My theory would be that Jennifer is a pop culture icon, the article is trying to grab the attention of a younger generation who would appreciate Jennifer and her opinion.

So why are the newspapers so different? Let's take a look at some factual statistics that might back up my theory of the age difference between the two.

These charts represent the age and social classes of the readers of The Sun, it's interesting to notice how varied and balanced the age demographic is for the "print" and how common the 65+ classification is.

Compare this to the The Sun's PC online news service, notice how the age is significantly younger. You've got a high percentage of 15-34 year olds, and then from 35 onwards.

At first glance it may seem like these stats for The Times readers are fairly similar, but that's not the case. notice how the purple on the circle is significantly larger. This is stating that 65+ aged readers make up 35% of the readership rather than The Sun's 25.9%

The next thing to compare would be the social demographics of the two, notice how in the Sun the highest percentage demographic is DE adults (This is the lowest class) where as in the Times the highest percentage is AB adults (The highest class)

Compiling this information together, you can determine that:

-The majority of Times readers are elder wealthy people
-The majority of Sun readers are younger more poor people

Newspaper companies obviously take this crucial information into account when creating their articles, if you return to the articles displayed above. You can notice how the articles are just presented for a whole other generation. The Times is very text heavy and the text is just all over the page, the language is also very informative.

Where as the Sun has very neat little packed blocks of text with a use of a more simplistic language, the language is also very persuasive and a bit playful. The key things to notice on the Sun's page are these words:

"RUMP V TRUMP"
And
"ELECTION SHOCK"

The language is trying to entice a more simplistic eye, perhaps someone who's easily entertained. Someone craving a bit of drama.

Newspapers trying to aim for higher or lower class people could be classified as identifying them through their work life.
You might say for example, that someone with a higher pay check has had a better education. And is therefore more likely to understand complex English language.

With the information I've received about target audiences, here's my crack at a magazine cover that would appeal to both audiences.

Firstly, we have the cover that would appeal to Sun readers:

This is the kind of cover you might expect, with bait style text thrown all over the page. The language used would be extremely dramatic in the attempt of attracting the readers.

Now let's take a look at a Times reader cover:

With Times readers, you would expect a much more formal approach. The language is formal and immediately to the point. You know the content of the magazine, but it is not overwhelming. And it is by no means trying to bait readers in by using over the top dramatic language.

Another thing to notice is my male focused approach on the design of the magazine, this is through discovering that the Times has a largely male dominated demographic.

So what kinds of magazines would both types of readers actually be interested in? Here are two mood boards to represent that, firstly we have the Sun readers:

You can immediately notice an identical approach in use of language, notice especially the bottom four from the left.

"I'm Pregnant!"
"MURDER!"
"BAIT TRICK FOR BIG FISH"
"FAMILY TRAGEDY!"

Now compare it to Times Readers magazines:

There's a lot of informative and descriptive language, but nothing made to bait audiences.
Despite the "Ready to kick on!" on the Horse and hound cover, none of the language is a deliberate excitement provocation, it simply informs you what's in the magazine you're about to read.

So how do newspaper companies discover the audiences they're going to focus on? They do this through a technique known as methodology. There are many methods to go about gathering this information, but methodology focuses on a detailed interview.

The interview is a very personal approach to this research, it is a continuous survey involving over 33,225 interviews a year with adults aged at least 15. Interviewees are randomly selected and the interview is done within their own home. On average the interview can take roughly 27 minutes and it covers what they're interested in from a list of newspapers and magazines, it also covers their online activity and some personal information about them.

Here's an example of the questions asked in the survey, notice how they poke at what the reader might be interested in seeing the magazine. This allows them to decide what content they'll be displaying clearly on the page.

You can for example relate this back to the Sun article with Jennifer Lopez, the use of a pop icon would please both the fashion and pop audience.

If I had to give advice to a new magazine called News UK for example, regarding how they can determine who their audience is and if their magazine is achieving it's goal. I would offer these research tips, firstly:

-An interview
An interview like the one above can give you a detailed insight into a considerable amount of personal information regarding your chosen interviewee, with all of this personal information you can begin to build a magazine that focuses on specific interests.

-A focus group
A focus group consists of the interviewer and a group of specific (or purposefully random) people, it is essentially an interview but with multiple people.