In my newsroom, we take whatever pitch is thrown at us each day and we swing at it. Whether we connect with a bunt single or a home run, it’s always our goal to report accurately and balanced.

Unfortunately, in the starkly divided society in which we now live, our readers — and even our sources — don’t always see it that way. As a result, we often are thrown curve- balls. I suspect politicians do that hoping to shield themselves from realities we will report.

It’s no secret the news media has been challenged in covering state Rep. Mike Loychik, R-Bazetta.

Some of those challenges have been spelled out previously on this very page. Frankly, the lack of communication with Loychik is unusual. State legislators generally are forthcoming with local media. Most want to build open relationships because they understand we are a conduit to their constituency.

I believe my newspaper has gone out of its way to give Loychik the benefit of the doubt on his dissatisfaction with our report-

ing.

We changed the reporter who covered his office, and I personally have spoken with him about improving communication. Loychik would speak only off-the-record, but promised availability in the future, leaving me to believe we had a breakthrough.

Subsequently, Loychik and I traded a few texts and attempted to set up interviews to speak on his terms. None ever came to fruition. And then, silence. He stopped returning my texts, and as a result, we stopped writing much about his activities. That’s a shame because we have an obligation to share with readers activities of elected officials.

In February, I attempted unsuccessfully to discuss his legislation to cut term lengths for board of education members. In March, I invited Loychik to share his thoughts on the governor’s State of the State address. In April, as is customary, we mailed him a primary election candidate questionnaire and invited him to participate in our endorsement process. I texted to ensure he had received it.

Each response? Crickets.

Then, last week Donald Trump Jr. came to town stumping for Loychik’s re-election bid.

When we filed for media credentials, we got no response. Later, my reporter approached Loychik at an unrelated event, identified herself and asked if the Trump Jr. event would be open to media. Loychik said we needed to apply for credentials.

We already had done that, but we played his game and re-applied. Finally, the morning of the event we received word that media would not be permitted inside.

Understanding the importance of Trump Jr.’s visit and our obligation to provide coverage, our reporter went to the facility anyway, identified herself and was promptly turned away. We covered the event by speaking to attendees in the

parking lot as they left the event.

Trump Jr. apparently spoke along the usual Republican talking points, including criticizing media and stereotyping how we cover Republican politicians.

It wasn’t until a day later that I learned a local news crew from WKBN-TV had been allowed in to cover the event. In fact, it later came to light that Loychik actually had informed WKBN days earlier they would be solely permitted to cover the event.

OK, I get it. It’s Loychik’s event. It’s his prerogative to let in whoever he chooses.

But here is my question: If Loychik knew he was going to play favorites, why not just tell us that up front?

The story doesn’t end here.

We wrote the article, including that most media were banned.

A reader commented on the story, which we posted on the newspaper’s Facebook page. He speculated perhaps we were banned because we had endorsed Loychik’s primary election opponent. Then he added, “Other media was there and inside.”

And just like that, guess who slides up with a comment on this newspaper’s Facebook page?

“There sure was! WKBN was there all night having a blast,” posted “Mike Loychik for State Representative.”

Really? Now Loychik suddenly is available to comment publicly? On the newspaper’s Facebook page?

Perhaps Loychik fears giving us even a chance at being fair in our coverage because he knows we will ask hard questions and demand he explain his reasoning on positions he’s taken on controversial issues.

From my vantage point, we have upheld our end of the bargain in attempting to open lines of communication with this state rep, despite the curveballs he’s thrown.

It is he who has fallen short on the deal. And that means he’s fallen short on his constituents.

blinert@tribtoday.com