Explorers Or Boys Messing About?

Question 1

Title

Answer 1

The title poses a rhetorical question, with the use of the idiomatic phrase “boys messing about” creating the impression that the men were naive and childlike:

The title reveals the author’s negative bias towards the men

Question 2

Facts and figures

Answer 2

Morris sticks to a journalist style in the article by employing facts and statistics:

“The four-seater Robinson R44 has a single engine”

“100 miles off Antarctica, about 36 miles north of Smith Island”

“Nine-hour rescue”

This lends credibility to the writer’s underlying criticism of the expedition

Question 3

Opinion presented as fact

Answer 3

The opinions of experts and the implied opinion of the writer are presented as truths:

Morris reports that the “men’s adventure had cost…tens of thousands of pounds”

Question 4

Use of experts

Answer 4

Morris uses expert quotations to support his message that the men were foolish and socially irresponsible:

“Experts questions the wisdom of taking a small helicopter”

The fundamental criticism of the article, that the cost of rescuing the men would ultimately fall to the taxpayer, is reinforced by referencing The Ministry of Defence spokesperson, who said it was “highly unlikely” it would recover any of the money

Question 5

Rule of three

Answer 5

The rule of three is employed when listing the organisations involved in the rescue, emphasising its scale and cost:

“Royal Navy, the RAF and British coastguards”

Question 6

Bias

Answer 6

The writer’s bias against the men’s adventure is implied throughout the article:

He casts doubt on the men’s credentials, reporting that Mr Smith “claims to have been flying since the age of five”

He starts the article with a statement, underpinning his criticism of their actions: “Their last expedition ended in farce”