How did journalism go from 'playing it straight' to 'playing' its readers

President Trump was railroaded on his recent indictment. The Rochester Voice feels the same way on Right to Know requests. (Courtesy photo)

Journalism has seen many reporting style foraya from one method of reporting to another over the decades.
I remember John Whiteman, former editor of the Portsmouth Herald back in the 1980s, who when asked by a reporter how they should write a particular story, always had the same four words of advice.
"Just play it straight," he'd say.
Then there was Peter Swanson, who was inaugural editor of the former Foster's Sunday Citizen. Swanson formatted its fledgling design style in the fall of 1997, and its first press run was on Nov. 2 of that year.
Swanson's sense of a story's cache would hinge on a simple question: "Is this useful to readers?" The more usefulness, the higher the play on the page.
Now, unfortunately, the new ":modus operandi" of story telling and informing has become far more sinister, far more nefarious.
It's called "solutions-based journalism" and is loosely defined as "an approach to news reporting that focuses on the responses to social issues as well as the problems themselves."
However, in this journalism paradigm, the media doesn't shine a light on the problem, except to shine a brighter light on what the "solution" is.
So the coverage is bias from the outset. The press is writing stories to lead you to what "they" think is the solution.
This is not reporting the news. This is indoctrination.
The definitions of indoctrination is, "the process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically."
It's like what the Chinese Communist Party does in re-education camps.
What it isn't, is impartial journalism. It's a farce and it's a slap in the face to journalists who used to be taught to "play it straight."
One of the most blatant example of this is the way the mainstream media is covering President Trump's recent indictment on charges that he mishandled classified documents.
After his arraignment in Florida last week, the former president gave a fiery speech at Mar-a-Lago.
The day after one news organization wrote the headline, "Trump holds political rally on his Day of Disgrace."
Really? I didn't know it was a disgrace to be railroaded.
The Rochester Voice was railroaded by the City of Rochester a couple of months ago, when after requesting documents in a Right to Know request, City Attorney Terence O'Rourke said the city would no longer honor the award-winning digital daily's Right to Know requests because The Voice not a citizen of New Hampshire.
True, I live in Maine, but I am registered with the NH Secretary of State's Office, was voted Rochester Business of the Year in 2021, am a member of the Rochester Chamber of Commerce since 2017 and a member since 2017 of the New Hampshire Press Association, where we have won 14 Distinguished Journalism Awards in the past six years! All while being Rochester's only hometown digital daily.
So I guess when we got too close for comfort with our Right to Know requests, they figured the best solution was to "suddenly find out" they didn't have to honor my request since the editor of The Voice was not a New Hampshire citizen. Hmmm.
So I guess that's what you call "solutions-based" government.
Keep in mind the city of Rochester had prior to its decision in April to deny our Right to Know requests, fulfilled those requests the previous six years.
Meanwhile, the solutions-based journalism strategy with Trump is to assemble an endless barrage of Trump-bashing articles, exposes and nonsensical tomes designed to "indoctrinate" the American people that he's far more dangerous than Hitler, Attila the Hun or Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs combined.
Not since the Russia collusion hoax has mainstream media been in this kind of frenzy, sending assignment editors into fits of delirium. Just so you know, assignment editors do just that: order up particular stories from reporters.
The day after Trump's so-called "Day of Disgrace," the big headline across many news outlets was, "Just how much time could Trump serve if found guilty?"
Now does it sound like that story is trying to "play it straight?"
Does it sound like that story is going to be "useful for readers?"
Of course not. It's solutions-based reporting.
And what is the solutions.
Get rid of Trump even though at least half the country thinks he did a great job during his four years despite incredible aggression and interference from mainstream media. Consider the Mueller report that found no Russia collusion. Two impeachments that were unfounded. So much bile and berating from the mainstream media.
But what would be useful to readers today is to know that Biden said at the end of a speech last week, "God save the queen!"
Or that he groped Eva Longoria prior to a screening of her new movie Flamin' Hot at the White House the other day.
The man is not with it, and everyone knows it.
But they don't write about it.
If Trump bumbled his way through a speech they'd have five clinicians dissecting every malaprop.
Is solutions-based journalism the final solution?
If it is it could be the endgame for our republic.