I like how the reporter structured this so it would be more of an online article, I just think the subheads could have been a bit more descriptive. The article does not have too many direct quotes from sources, it really just lists the events and how they unfolded without much more insight. The article never states the employees names, which may be for a legal reason, but not identifying them makes the article a bit confusing. The reader is not sure which employee did what. The majority of the information seems to have come for the audit paper. Quotes are very limited and honestly do not really add much weight to the story, Barnickle is just stating the obvious. Its like the reporter got a couple quotes from him just for the ... More »

I think this is a fairly good piece of journalism, with the exception that I would have liked to see more straight quotes from Gross and Dunsworth and not just a lot of paraphrased paragraphs. I thought that the article was good for being original and not something that would be covered on a widespread scale, but it is still important to the student population and community of Towson. This is also a story that the reporter could come back to and follow up on. That being said the writing was pretty good. The lead was interesting but maybe could have captured the readers attention better. I though it had a nice flow of ideas in it and didn't really place blame on anyone, only through Gross's words. They didn't really introduce ... More »

Although in many ways this is not a conventional piece of journalism, I really liked how it worked with the subject matter. The article is more of a tribute than a hard news or features piece, but I liked the article. I thought it was very well written, especially in the intro and it gave me, a reader from new jersey with no knowledge of Schaefer, a great image of who the man was. Was the article perhaps a little bias? Sure, but I think that for an obituary of man of Schaefer's standing it is nice to go out with people doting and praising, not ripping apart his career. I am very impressed with how many quotes were added to the article, the reporter really got quotes from anyone and everyone. I'm sure tons of people wanted to ... More »

The organization of this article perplexes me. It jumps all over the place from a jumbled lead to the mini paragraph within a paragraph about Shelia Dixon. Then it gives one vague quote that doesn't add much to the gist of the story and some paragraphs painting a picture of Mfume in a bad light. The article brought up all the negatives about Mfume before highlighting the good aspects, leaving the reader with a derogatory feeling about the ex-candidate. Some quotes about why he is not running as well would have bolstered the weak, Wikipediaesc information in the article and added a little extra depth. Although really, how deep can you get on an article based on a foundation of hearsay?

The funny thing about this article is its pretty much just checking in on the state of crabs in Maryland, or at least that's how the reporter wrote it. By only getting one quote and using statistics for the rest of the article, all this pretty much said was that the crab population is doing better, but its still not great. I think that, although there may not be a lot to the story on the surface, the reporter could have gone deeper and interviewed maybe some seafood merchants or fisherman about how the statistics effect them. I have to say for what it aimed to do, the article was very informative, I now know more about the state of crabs in Maryland than I did 5 minutes ago.

I think this was a very good piece of journalism. I felt the story got to the heart and soul of what produce and suburban vendors are feeling now in this box store obsessed culture. I like how the article made its point through a series of anecdotes and comparisons and contrasts. It gave a very wide array of perspectives that yeah, the market is harsher but at least the streets are cleaner. The article did show quite a bit of depth, the conflict between old roots and new growth and the issues surrounding the community.

This article was more of a laundry list of facts, but I think that with the subject matter, there really wasn't too much room for quotes. It was merely showing the American public how the Obamas were spending their money by looking at their tax return, although I think the information could have been confirmed by more sources. For some people who blame Obama for overspending and what not it could put them in line of where reality is. I like how for the most part it was pretty fair.

I like how the article had a lot of good background information in the introduction and a good use of pictures. It would have been nice to have some direct quotes from developers just to know it was well sourced and not second-hand information. I think it did a good job of updating the public on the situation in that area because you generally don't get to hear about the logic behind construction.

I think that this article is very straight forward and has a lot of great facts and statistics, it really gives the reader a sense of the scope of this bill. I think it was well sourced, they got a variety of people and it looks like they interviewed the people themselves. Overall it was very informative and I think well written for its purpose.

While the topic the reporter chose to focus on was quite different and may have taken a different angle, the article as a whole was not well organized and lacked direct sources. Many of the quotes were not from sources interviewed directly but rather from local newspaper website comment sections, which may not be the most professional place to pull from. It would have been better to get a couple perspectives from officials or verify people who live on the island and aren't just trying to find another illegal immigrant story to rant on. The article seemed a bit disjointed, starting out talking about how Obama was coming to town, then diving in to dissect the car accident with Brandy Gibson.