This article jumps around from different points of view (why is Obama mentioned? It seems to be only to grab attention). It tries to make the reader angry, and then mentions later that the girl was going over 80 and the Brazilian was going 9 mph. This is just above trash.

The author clearly states his case concerning these two horrific crimes. His writing asks questions that are not easy to answer, but are necessary all the same in a society with so much violence that only the most horrific crimes are covered.

This is good journalism because the reporter backs up their claim nicely with facts from reputable sources: the Waterfront Partnership, the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science and the Maryland Department of the Environment. There is no blaming of political agendas here as well; this reporter addresses the problem. However, I would have liked to hear a little more about what the Maryland Department of the Environment is doing to help the pungent Harbor. The article redeems itself once again in its conclusion by stating a call to action of sorts for its readers. Overall, a decent article that is well written, but could have been more in depth.