A Critical Analysis Of D-Day By Britanna

Firstly, the Britannica’s article, “D-day,” presents more of a subjective tone than objective by the author’s word choice, which creates the emotion from the reading. When the reader is reading this article, they would think that the Germans were the bad guys, because of the no perspective of the Germans. Also by the wording like “bitter defence,” which made it seem like the Germans were bad. This article is stating, “Germany’s bitter defense, however, was costing them men and equipment that could not be replaced.” which is presenting that the Germans were strong and bad to people. The author is biased with the specific word he/she uses like “devastating air attacks,” and “Normandy campaign had been a stunning success,” which was specifically to the Allies of how they can succeed by the power they have to win for good reasons. Though …show more content…
First of all, the author is anonymous which makes you question about who this author is and how credible he/she is on this topic. Also there is a question about who he/she was and where the author was born and who was the people who influenced him/her. Adding on to that, the sources that the author got it from were from the Utah Beach Museum, PBS, and the United States Holocaust Museum. If you go onto the PBS website, it says the webpage is not available which makes the sources more suspicious and the article more subjective. If you go onto the Utah Beach Museum, it will only tell you about when the anniversary of D-day is and where to go. Also on the D-day topic, it was only supporting the “American heroes,” which makes people think that the Germans were bad and only the Allies were good people, but had no side of the Germans. Lastly, the United States Holocaust website is not biased and does not state any sides and is a good non-biased website. Other than that, the sources are objective and suspicious. This is how the author’s credibility and sources are