Question

"Use evidence from each document to explain which is more accurate and why?"

>there are two articles about the French Revolution, describing the Storming of the Bastille. Both are on alphahistory if you want to see them. One is for a Paris newspaper written by a Frenchman, the other is a letter written by a British ambassador.
I think each is biased, but one is an actual Frenchman recounting it and the other is an official. I personally think the British Ambassador is more accurate. Thoughts?

Answer 1

Have you read the articles? You must read them, evaluate what seems biased and what seems to be accurate and unbiased reporting. Look for value judgements in both articles, a sure indication of bias. If one praises actions taken in the revolution, does it indicate bias? If one is critical of participants or actions, is that bias? Description of events may be accurate (or not)without demonstrating bias. Look for things like that. Then only you can write about what you have read and explain why you think what you think about it.