By Adam Drapcho and Julie Hart, The Laconia Daily Sun

On this week’s episode of The Granite Beat we spoke with Amanda Gokee, a reporter with The Boston Globe. When The Globe decided to open a New Hampshire bureau, Amanda’s local credibility and experience at the New Hampshire Bulletin was exactly what they needed to shine a light on what’s happening in the Granite State for local, regional, and national audiences. In her new role she has written about everything from politics to health, education to climate, and breaking news to trans healthcare.

Catherine McLaughlin:

You started your career with these vibrant online news sources, and then now with The Globe you've switched to the largest legacy outlet in the region. What has that change been like for you? How has it impacted the way you approach reporting?

Amanda Gokee:

Yeah, it has been a huge transition. Starting my career with those outlets was a narrative that certainly makes a lot of sense – I was a younger career journalist, it was kind of this emerging model – and I'm so grateful for the opportunities and platforms those different outlets provided me. And then, it's exciting, of course, to be approached by an outlet like The Globe that does have a more established presence in the region. The New Hampshire Bureau is new, but The Globe has been here all along and covering the state of New Hampshire. In terms of how I think about the work and how that's changed, I think that is a really good question. I feel like with the nonprofit model, there was a luxury that there was really no overarching pressure from leadership about the stories that we were writing, how they would land with readers. I think it was much more coming from a place of, we have a duty and an obligation to cover the inner workings of the statehouse and what's going on here. I think all reporters feel that to an extent. In the time I've been at The Globe, there's a lot more strategy and thinking about connecting with readers – in a way that I really appreciate, but it has been a change in thinking. Like there's a team that's dedicated to doing social media. When you're going about your day-to-day reporting that isn't something you necessarily feel like oh, I want to make beautiful Instagram posts to showcase the work I've done. It's kind of like you've written the story, you've gotten it out there, maybe you send off a quick Tweet. But the fact that we have a team that's thinking about that really carefully – it's a privilege to work in that kind of an organization because it is important to meet readers where they're at. And if it's going to be on social media, which I'm sure a lot of younger people are consuming their news there, it's wonderful that we are able to offer that and get that to people. It's also been a shift from The Bulletin specifically, in that The Bulletin had a really specific niche focus of the statehouse. It was always thinking like, how do I take something that's happening at the statehouse, connect that to somebody in a community, a real human, show how that’s impacting their lives. And now I feel like I have a wide open, blank slate where I'm looking at the whole state. Kind of like, anything can be on the table if you can make a compelling case for it. So really thinking through if I, as a reporter for The Boston Globe, I'm going to be choosing this story of all stories in the state to cover, why am I doing that? What is the reasoning for choosing one thing over the other? It is a responsibility, because it has the potential to launch things to a different level. Some national news outlets are going to be looking into what The Globe is covering in a way that they might not be with as fine of a tooth comb, poring over all of the local stories that are coming out of a state. It's something I keep in the back of my mind; not from a place of like, oh gosh, what's gonna happen if the story goes viral or explodes in a certain way that is out of your control, but more from a sense of wanting to feel really sure about here's why, here's my reasoning, I've talked it through with the editor, and this is why we think this is a story that merits the time and the attention.

Catherine McLaughlin:

You've got a small team covering the whole state at The Globe. How do you make those decisions about what to cover and what not to cover?

Amanda Gokee:

One of the things that I’ve felt lucky about is how our editor has said this is really a reporter-driven project and endeavor from the beginning. It is a luxury to have that sort of support from your editor. And she's obviously coming in with a lot of experience and that good judgment, and can ask probing questions of us when that's needed. I work with another colleague and I think we do have that wonderful gift of being able to explore the stories that we're interested in. I’ve heard editors say this before, and I think it tends to be true: when you're in a reporting situation where you're allowed to pursue your interests and do the things that you're curious about, it hones that instinct you have as a reporter of, I think there is really something meaningful or interesting here, this is a story that deserves to be told in the state. That being said, as we're talking now we're three months into this, so I think it's also very much an evolution and something that's in process, and we're still figuring out where we can have the most impact, and just weighing those different things. There's so many ways of deciding what to cover on a particular day, what rises to the top. So I think some is interest, some is that question of impact, what are the stories that we're in a position or have the resources to dive deeper into that is not necessarily getting covered in other places, trying to have as good of a sense as we can and be smart about where the gaps are in the media landscape. And not wanting to duplicate. If there's already going to be three reporters going to the Executive Council and they're going to walk away with similar coverage, how can we approach that differently or do something that puts that news into context? Just trying to keep an eye out for those sorts of opportunities as they arise.

Catherine McLaughlin:

You mentioned your editor, who I believe also oversees The Globe’s Rhode Island desk. What is it like establishing a new desk for such an established paper? And what are the challenges there?

Amanda Gokee:

Yeah, that's such a good question. It is kind of crazy. I mean, it's been wonderful, our editor is great – and you're right, she does Rhode Island as well. We have certainly looked to Rhode Island as a model. That being said, they have seven reporters there and we have two, so she's always trying to make the case that, look, we're not going to do the exact same thing as what's going on in Rhode Island. There was a legacy paper there that has really declined in recent years, so they're kind of scooping up a lot of that territory. It's not the same situation in New Hampshire. One of the things our editor said to us early on was we're building the airplane as we're flying it. So we're jumping in and figuring out as we go what works. I think that has the benefit that you can be very responsive to people – we're putting out this daily newsletter, so we're hearing from people every day what they like, what they don't like, what's working for readers. You have that startup mentality where we have a ton of agency in terms of being able to try this thing a couple days this week and see how it lands, does that work for readers, what kind of response are we getting on it. Then we can adjust as we go. I feel like that's been my experience, and it can be a lot to feel like you're starting something from scratch, but you do have that blank slate that you're working from.

Catherine McLaughlin:

We've talked a little bit about your transition from working for a nonprofit paper to a more traditional paper. What has that transition been like in terms of your sources? Have you found that a lot of them have followed you? Or have your interactions with them been different?

Amanda Gokee:

That's an awesome question. It has definitely changed. I think maybe the reason is not so much because of going from a nonprofit to a for-profit, but more how at The Bulletin I was focused on a couple of beats – I was covering energy and environment, I did some voting rights stuff, I was always really interested in minority communities and how the state is diversifying. So I had sources kind of broadly in those three areas, and a lot of the sources were closely clustered around statehouse issues. Now I've found that this has been a great opportunity for source building and talking to people. I think particularly we're interested in folks in the southern tier, just because there is sort of an affinity with Massachusetts – it's geographically much closer, those communities do have some overlapping interests, and they're also where Globe subscribers are located right now. So connecting with different local leaders in the southern part of the state, which I wasn't necessarily focusing on in my last role – I'm always happy to have the opportunity to talk to new people. One of the challenges, particularly energy reporting, is that so many of the people working in that space and, subsequently, so many of my sources were white and male. Something I'm really acutely aware of is the diversity of my sourcing, so this is a moment where I'm also thinking through that, as I'm making new relationships and looking to expand the range of people that I'm talking to. Any opportunity to dive into new local communities that I haven't necessarily interacted with before, I think is an exciting one.

Catherine McLaughlin:

You mentioned the relationship between New Hampshire and its proximity to Massachusetts. Do you think of your readers as being from New Hampshire, or see yourself as reporting on New Hampshire for The Globe's existing audience?

Amanda Gokee:

I think it's a little bit of both. Recognising that The Globe does have audience already in New Hampshire, and it's a surprisingly high number. Personally, I am really interested in reporting on New Hampshire for New Hampshire, so I think in the conversations and to the extent that it's something I have a say in, it's what I'm pushing for. I think people here really do bristle at that feeling of somebody parachuting in and saying, Oh look how quaint this town is and how cute things are here. I don't think people necessarily like that. With that said, I think a lot of New Hampshire stories are of a broader regional interest, because what's happening in New Hampshire is really fascinating and it is a big player in the region. There's news being made here all the time that's relevant to people in Massachusetts, so it's finding the right way of covering it. But definitely first, this is coverage for New Hampshire.

Catherine McLaughlin:

I'd like to ask you about a specific story you published recently working to fill the gaps in transgender healthcare and the newsletter version accompanying it called, “With trans healthcare, there are not two sides to the story”. Could you tell us how the decision was made to cover this issue from that angle? And what did you learn?

Amanda Gokee:

This was something where everybody in our little New Hampshire bureau has been really aware and following what's happening in the statehouse, and this was an opportunity to take a step back from that and say, right, we know that this has become this hot button, super politicized issue right now – what are folks who are actually providing this care to people on the ground saying about it? What is their experience at this particular moment? How is it impacting their work? So that was for me, the starting point. Also recognising we have this one clinic in the state that provides this kind of care for kids. I was kind of coming at it from a place of personal curiosity about what that work looks like, what are they hearing from parents, what are they hearing from patients. So we basically sat down with two of the providers at the clinic to talk through their work, what it looks like, the kind of care that they're providing, what their conversations with families are like. One of the things that was clear very, very early on in our interaction was that these two providers were cautious, and hesitant about talking to reporters. That, to me, is already interesting. They were raising issues with coverage that they've seen in other mainstream outlets, and I wanted to hear more from them about what they found so troubling about that coverage to better understand it. That sort of gets to your point about the quote, where they were saying there aren't two sides to this coverage, making a critique of the way media has traditionally covered a lot of stories with the both-sides approach of, here are doctors who are in favor of trans health care and here are doctors who are opposed to trans health care. What the providers I talked to said was, that doesn't really work here because we're talking about evidence-based science and best-practice medicine, so the media coverage should reflect that and not try to find that one dissenting voice to “balance out” a story.

This article is part of The Granite Beat, a project by The Laconia Daily Sun and The Granite State News Collaborative, of which Laconia is a partner. Each week Adam Drapcho and Julie Hart, will explore with local reporters how they got some of the most impactful stories in our state and why they matter. This project is being shared with partners in The Granite State News Collaborative.