World Issues: Comparing two articles – Colin Powell at the World Summit

Recently many of the worlds le fruit drinkrs met in Johannesburg for the commonwealth summit. It was called to mark the 10th anniversary of a meeting in Rio de Janeiro which managed to designate up a number of important environmental agreements. Unfortunately the USAs president, George scouring did non attend exclusively sent his secretary of state, Colin Powell instead. There were 65, 000 delegates and 174 countries were represented. The first-year earth summit, hosted in Rio de Janeiro (1992) managed to set up several agreements, based on the environment and the future shape of global industrial development.It set up an agenda called agenda 21. This agenda set out the way that planet-wide environmental improvements could be achieved if local authorities made more of a antecedence of issues such as cycle and energy conservation. Now looking confirm at the summit from 10 years in the future, I in person think it was a failure, nothing seems to have changed. Problems such as pollution and energy conservation just seem to have gotten worse. Although things like recycling have begun to grow in several(prenominal) countries e. g. UK. The Articles The lie article states facts or so what happened when Colin Powell was eing heckled. It has little information close what was actually discussed. It could have tell the narrative behind the summit and the reasons for the heckling.The quantify article is more in shrewdness. It goes behind the summit and states its background while still stating information about Colin Powells heckling and also the achievements of the summit e. g. the agreement, aimed at reducing world pauperization and protecting the environment. It also has statements from the some of the world leaders such as there should not be any more such mega-summits which was ade by the Prime Minister of Denmark and the president of the European Union. Comparing the dickens articles, I find that The Times article is more detailed than The sunnin ess article. Also there be the differences in language which you find amidst a tabloid (Sun) and a broadsheet (Times).The Sun seems to deal with the main(prenominal) issue of Colin Powells heckling while The Times deals with the summit as a whole with Colin Powells heckling included. The writers approach the article in different shipway because of the types of newspaper they oeuvre for (e. g. tabloid) and perhaps there ersonal opinion on the subject. The Sun article is based more on the interesting parts of the accompanying with Colin Powell and also has hints of the writers opinion e. g. agreement was brand inadequate. While The Times article deals with issues of the summit and includes information about Colin Powells heckling. e. g. Powells speech made it top out that the Bush administration has written off the planet Both articles are biased but The Sun is more than The Times.The Sun seems to be pro-America which room most of its comments seem to make America seem in the remediate and are trying to create sympathy for Colin Powell. But The Times is very(prenominal) critical of America Bush has written off the planet purge though it is critical, it does not mean that its against America but it does seems to nit-pick. To draw this to a close, I think that The Times article and The Sun article expressed different opinions on these events. Some points were bad while others were good. I retrieve that The Times article is the best due to its contrast of opinion and in depth information of the summit.I think that the Johannesburg summit like its harbinger was a failure even though some agreements were made. Some of the delegates branded the agreements inadequate therefore not everyone liked it. Also one of the biggest problems (America) did not seem to take much notice and as I stated have written off the planet. The main problem with putting agreements into set is that perhaps some countries will adopt a scheme but not all countries will so the prob lem goes on and that some of the people on these countries will not do the extra work required to make it work (e. g. Recycling)