EnglishFreePrintable

Media Perspectives Analysis Worksheet

A free english worksheet ready for your classroom. Open in Kuraplan to grab the print-ready PDF, customize it for your students, or generate a fresh version in seconds.

Download now

Name:Date:

Media Perspectives Analysis Worksheet

Read both fictional media extracts about a proposed offshore wind farm near a coastal lighthouse. Then answer the questions using evidence from the extracts. Consider who is speaking, what each writer emphasises, and how language positions readers.

Media extract A — “A chance to power the coast”

By a fictional regional energy reporter The proposed Marlin Shoal wind farm could supply renewable electricity to about 80,000 homes, according to the project’s planning summary. The developer says construction would create 240 short-term jobs and 35 ongoing roles. For a region where young workers often leave to find employment, those figures deserve attention. The turbines would stand beyond the headland, visible from the old lighthouse on clear days. Some residents worry that the view will change. That concern is understandable, but a view is not the only measure of a coastline’s value. The project also promises a community fund for local services and a contribution to marine monitoring. No large energy project is impact-free. The planning process should test the claims, protect wildlife and require clear reporting. But rejecting the proposal before that assessment is complete would close off a practical opportunity. The coast can preserve its heritage while helping to build a cleaner energy supply.

Media extract B — “What will the turbines cost us?”

By a fictional community columnist Supporters of the Marlin Shoal proposal lead with impressive numbers: electricity for 80,000 homes, 240 construction jobs and 35 ongoing roles. But figures in a planning summary are promises, not proof of what this community will experience. The turbines would be visible from the old lighthouse, a landmark that draws visitors and gives the headland much of its character. The developer’s community fund may sound reassuring, yet it cannot guarantee that tourism businesses will not lose income or that marine life will avoid harm. Those who live and work along this coast should not be asked to accept uncertainty in exchange for benefits that may be temporary or unevenly shared. Renewable energy matters. So does asking who carries the risk and who receives the reward. Before any approval, independent studies should examine wildlife, tourism and local livelihoods, and residents should have a genuine say. Calling this proposal an obvious opportunity risks making difficult questions sound like an inconvenience.

Analyse the perspectives

Use precise evidence from the extracts. A strong response distinguishes what a text says from how its language encourages readers to respond.

1.Which perspective is most strongly advanced in extract A?

The project should be rejected because any change harms heritage.
The project deserves careful assessment because it may bring energy and employment benefits.
Tourism should be the only factor in the decision.
The project has already been proven harmless.

2.Identify one phrase in extract B that casts doubt on the developer’s evidence. Explain what the phrase implies.

3.Match each quotation to the main way it shapes the reader’s response.

“a view is not the only measure of a coastline’s value”
“who carries the risk and who receives the reward”
“figures … are promises, not proof”

Questions the reliability of projected benefits
Reframes the debate by placing visual heritage alongside other benefits
Raises a fairness question about how costs and benefits are distributed

4.True or false: Both extracts acknowledge that the proposal involves uncertainty or requires further scrutiny. Support your choice with one detail from each extract.

TrueFalse

5.Complete the sentence: Extract A’s phrase “a practical opportunity” frames the proposal as .

6.Complete the sentence: Extract B’s phrase “an inconvenience” suggests that supporters may be difficult questions.

7.Compare the writers’ use of evidence. Identify one numerical claim used in both extracts and explain how each writer frames it differently.

8.What perspective or evidence is under-represented in both extracts? Name one relevant stakeholder or source of evidence and explain what it could add.

9.Which description best captures the tone of extract B?

Celebratory and certain
Cautious and sceptical
Detached and humorous
Nostalgic and wholly opposed to renewable energy

10.Evaluate how the two headlines position readers before they encounter the full arguments. Refer to a word or phrase in each headline.

11.Write a balanced judgement of the proposal based only on these extracts. Include one benefit, one concern, and one kind of evidence needed before a decision.