Difference between The Mail and The Guardian’s take on UCL migration study

EJHEATHUCA

uk-border_controlThe UCL released a study on migration last week, and both the Guardian and the Daily Mail wrote up their take on the subject, each putting their own political ideologies on the matter.

The clear political divide of the two newspapers is clear by their titles of the articles.

The Mail’s headline was ‘How migrants from outside Europe leave a £100billion hole in the public purse: Amount taken in benefits and services is 14% higher than money put back’.

This clearly shows that the Steve Doughty, who wrote the article, understands the audience he is writing for, a readership with a right-wing political viewpoint. The headline takes in the study, and summarises it in a negative form, how the migrants from outside Europe who leave a £100 billion hole, and take out more benefits than money they put back in, which tells readers that migrants are damaging our country.

This…

View original post 137 more words

Advertisements

About Standard Climate

Interested in all things about the Planet.
This entry was posted in McSafavi. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Difference between The Mail and The Guardian’s take on UCL migration study

  1. ejheathuca says:

    Thanks for re-blogging this

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s