This article is good journalism. I didn't have much trouble reading it or following along. I did, however, have some trouble towards the middle of the story after the writer says "D'Adamo recounted." The writer uses a comma at the end of the quote and continues to talk about what was said in the quote. The way this was written confused me a little bit. I have no big problems with this article other than the relevancy. No offense, but I could go through life not knowing that Mfume decided not to run for mayor of Baltimore. From what I read, he doesn't seem like a good candidate anyway. But I digress. Good article, keep it up.

Not the best piece of journalism I've seen, but it puts the important aspects of journalism to the test and passes that test well. Relevancy to me is slim, but I can see how it may affect others more directly.

This is good journalism. The story was very informative and definitely a feel-good pick-me-up story.

This is good journalism. The topic isn't necessarily one of great depth, and the writer knows this, keeping the article only a few paragraphs long. The title grabs you and the article delivers by giving you the information you came here to read. The facts and sources are perfect additions to the story and although there is only one very short quote, that one quote is put to good use. I recommend this story to any Baltimore-loving crab eater. It's a good pick-me-up to know that the crab population is skyrocketing and that the crab market is slowly getting better.

Right off the bat, in the first paragraph, you find yourself staring at a grammatical error. Not a good start to any story. This story does provide good facts, I will give it that, but that's about it. There are other grammatical errors sprinkled throughout the article, and some slight repetition is pretty noticeable. Short and sweet and to the point is what this writer was going for, but they got a little less than half of that. The only thing the reader leaves with from this article is the information provided, not with any excellent writing tips from by the author. This story tries to be better, and I can see the writer doing better in the future, but not today.

This is an average piece of news writing. I thought it was pretty good towards the beginning, providing us with facts regarding Ed Hale's departure and facts about the company being bought out, but there were a few moments in the article where I had to go back and reread a sentence or two due to poor wording. Also about halfway through the article there is a quote that is written horribly wrong. The writer forgot to use quotation marks. You know, those things that make a quote, well, a quote? Besides a couple flaws the story is an informative read with good sourcing and structure. I would recommend it to others for the sole reason that this article is chock-full of information, but that's the only reason.

This story is a good example of good journalism, but I wouldn't go out and say it's anywhere near perfect. There are a few grammatical errors sprinkled into the story, but not enough to take away from the overall charm of the story. Same goes for the amount of personal opinion adapted into the article. There is a little bit of positive feeling toward the life of Mayor William Donald Schaefer throughout the entire reading, but once again not enough to make this a piece of bad journalism. Fraser Smith's sources, interviews, and quotes are all well done, and he has his facts straight. His transitions were smooth, and the length of the article was perfect in the sense that I didn't stop halfway through, but I also wasn't craving for ... More »

Yes it is. The facts provided and the sources given allow this article to be considered good journalism. Towards the beginning the author begins to show their opinion towards the income tax, but later on they sympathize by mention the things Schoenberg is doing, so the entire story isn't too biased. I recommend this article, it's well written.

It's okay journalism. The story is relevant in the sense that we should know about potential flooding in Maryland, but it's nothing that we can't find anywhere else online or on TV. The sources are given credit for information but not in AP Style format. It could be better, but the article has potential to be a lot better.

This article has several bits of bad journalism. Small typos and grammatical errors throughout the story take away from its validity. The article begins to talk about Obama, then turns around and talks about illegal immigrants. Also, the writer allows their opinion to bleed through about how illegal immigrants are working jobs that US citizens should be, and that's not a god form of journalism. You want to remain as objective as possible. Also the article's sources aren't the most solid I've ever seen. I don't believe this article does its job as good journalism.