The two news stories that I have chosen to compare are different in a few ways.

My first news story was about train fare price hikes and the second was about the war in
Russia, this contrast because one is about war and one is about a transport system which we
take for granted, however they are linked together because they both effect and have
effects on the economy.
In this first article we cover the topic of the newly introduced fare hike across tfl and the rest
of the rail services in the uk. We start off with a brief explanation of what the price hike is
how much the price is going up and why.
As we continue through the news piece, we are introduced to three different people and
their opinions, a big title that says “it's cheaper to drive” caught my attention. The first lady
is outraged as many have been that once again, they have decided to take the money from
the passenger instead of taking the time to figure out how to sell more tickets and profit off
affordability rather than extortionate prices.
This lady claims that it is more affordable for her to now drive over to Romford everyday
instead of taking the train.
It really feels although these companies are using everyone's reliance on their services to
take advantage of them and their money. As people can't simply just not go to work or
school because they don’t want to pay these fees, they do not get a choice!
It is not fair especially when considering people, the age of 16 (still in high school or college)
are expected to pay “adult” fees which for reference is £17.40 for a 30 min journy (London
bridge to Tonbridge) each way! People this age Especially still in high school can't work!
They are sitting exams and all their money comes from parents. You simply can't expect
them to pay an adult fee when they are not adults.
As we continue through the article, we have a few different thoughts on the matter.
One lady thinks that the price hikes are okay, and she understands why it is happening.
However the representation doesn’t feel varied enough, all the people speaking up have
been around the same age and around the same work class, race and living locations. They
can actually just about pay these prices even though they don’t have much left over from it.
They havent represented those that are poor and genuinely have no way to pay for their
way to work and at the same time as putting the prices up the service hasn’t shown any
improvement and train cancellations and delays continue to be rampant having many
inconvenienced and left wondering what exactly it is that they are paying so much more
for?
We also havent been proposed how much money the actually train staff and operators will
have added to their salary so we have no way of telling how much of this is going to be
pocketed by those big cooperations that don’t deserve the amount they already charge let
alone this extra.
It has also felt as though nobody had a chance to say that this is something they didn’t want
and offer other potential ideas so that the railways could make more money.
The reporter themselves seems to be trying to keep an unbiased opinion on the topic but it
is pretty clear they are also leaning towards outrage and don’t personally agree with what is
going on however lightly they managed to put it.

However, unlike this article the one talking about Ukraine is a lot shorter this is likely
because news on these topics are still being released and there isn't anything set in stone
yet so they must be careful when figuring out what they are and are not allowed to share.
All information is one tone and opinions aren't included, it's obviously a more serious tone
then the news on the price hikes and they are being concise and factual rather then taking a
lot of time to explain all different aspects of the issue, it is a crisis and they are making that
clear.
Aswell as being shorter there is also a lot less images as these will need to be regulated
before they are shown to the public and that is why images in stories like these are often
reused.
They don’t over explain and try to make anything more interesting then it is keeping things
neat and digestible so more and more people can take the information on board.
Looking at the layout of this news article it is much more fact sheet-like then the previous,
like a list filled with quotes and facts following them up to certify their legitimacy.
Through the quotes we get to see the main person who is representing the military and
civilians left in ukraine “Mr Marchenk” he Has explained everything very clearly giving a real
eye into what it is like in ukraine right now
When producing this they also obviously need to use language and structure that clearly
represents a serious and respectful tone, keeping in mind all the lives lost and those that are
still currently fighting and to make sure that those who did die have died to hold a clear
purpose
There is no room for the reporters opinion and for them to impose any sort of bais on the
situation as there is already a collective view point of the majority and that is what is being
represented here.
It is interesting, because both topics are somewhat serious but you can tell that they deal
with them both in very different ways. One is far more full of big tag lines and shocking
statistics that are meant to stir uproar whilst the other is simply meant to spread
information
Overall, we can see that

 Composition and tone are important and can shape everything

 The amount of media (photos, video) used can tell you about a piece
 Media can be highly biased