3,000 Student Newspapers Stolen at TU

The editor-in-chief of Towson University's Towerlight is complaining about the pace of a campus police investigation into the alleged theft of the weekly publication this month. Full Story »

Posted by Mary Hartney - via Patch - Towson
Tags Help
Stats Help
# Tweets: 2 (as of 2011-03-01)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Mary Hartney - Mar 1, 2011 - 8:18 AM PST
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Mary Hartney - Mar 1, 2011 - 9:16 AM PST

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Asia S. Hinton
3.9
by Asia S. Hinton - May. 2, 2011

Stealing newspapers from a college is kind of a “raw-deal”. There should have been better ways of expression frustration. However, the article was informative, especially since I am a Towson student. It was well written, but there was one section that stated that an incident like this has happened before, unless the editor was being cautious of space, I do think that he could have added a small excerpt of the previous case in which the newspapers were stolen, just to give a bit of history. The use of quotes and dates were well used, and also telling the normal amount of newspaper circulation was a good addition, since it lets readers know how many papers were stolen.

Disclosure: Asia is involved in this story (review not included in overall rating). Help
See Full Review » (15 answers)
Daniel Ciarrocchi
3.2
by Daniel Ciarrocchi - May. 2, 2011

This article provides a lot of informative details, but leaves out some key ones, most notably the law that Daniel Gross believes the perpetrators are violating. Because of the absence of the law and/or its interpretation, readers can easily be confused as to why it's possible to steal a free paper. It also is a bit questionable that this article is being written three weeks after the fact, but did a good job updating the progress of the investigation (or lack thereof).

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.1

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (5% confidence)
Quality
3.2
Facts
4.0
Fairness
3.0
Information
4.0
Insight
4.0
Sourcing
3.5
Style
3.5
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
2.0
Context
3.5
Depth
3.0
Enterprise
4.0
Expertise
4.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
3.0
Popularity
2.9
Recommendation
3.5
Credibility
3.5
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!