There has been plenty of discussion lately about free speech and censorship. As someone who conducted live radio interviews throughout the 1970s and early 1980s, and has hosted a regular podcast since 2016, I’ve been reflecting on the ethics of interviewing public officials as a journalist.
That reflection deepened after I read a recent column by Jim Shella in the Indianapolis Business Journal’s opinion section, Forefront. For those unfamiliar with his work, Shella covered state politics for WISH-TV in Indianapolis for more than three decades and hosted the long-running public broadcasting program Indiana Week in Review. Even in retirement, Shella continues to write and, as his most recent column revealed, occasionally joins podcasts. His perspective on how journalists should approach such conversations is worth noting.
When inviting public officials or political candidates to appear on my podcast, I’m often asked in advance what questions I plan to ask. My answer is always the same: I’ll share the general topics, but not the exact questions. Journalism doesn’t work when interviews are pre-scripted. On the rare occasion I get pushback, I point out that advance approval of questions is common practice in places like Russia, China, and North Korea—not here. That usually ends the debate, and most officials agree to participate. A few decline, and that is their choice.
In his column, Shella described being invited by public relations professional Robert Vane to join a podcast conversation with Indiana Senate Pro Tem Rod Bray. For those less familiar with the General Assembly, the Pro Tem is the Senate’s top leader, much like the Speaker of the House in that chamber.
At the time of the interview—August 28—redistricting was a hot issue, and Bray held significant influence over whether it would happen mid-decade. According to Shella, Vane asked him not to bring up redistricting. Shella refused, citing journalistic ethics. To Vane’s credit, he still allowed Shella to participate, and Bray knew the subject would likely come up.
When Shella asked about it, Bray offered the same canned response twice: “We have heard the ask and we are considering it.” The questions weren’t combative, but they went unanswered. Shella’s point in his column was clear: the public deserved more from such an influential elected leader.
I agree with Shella. Guests on my podcast aren’t entitled to know my specific questions in advance. What I offer instead is rare in today’s sound bite media climate: a long-form conversation, usually around 30 minutes, where officials and community leaders have the space to explain themselves fully. It’s not a “gotcha” setting—but it’s also not scripted.
Jim Shella is a member of the Indiana Journalism Hall of Fame, an honor he has earned. Even in retirement, he models the ethical standards he upheld throughout his career.
As for me, I left professional journalism years ago to serve in the federal civil service. Now, in retirement, I devote my time to writing this local news site and producing podcasts because I believe independent local journalism still matters. The ethics I learned decades ago as a broadcaster remain important today, even in a volunteer role.
Thanks for listening to my podcasts and for supporting this site.
You can read Jim Shella’s Forefront commentary at this link. IBJ does have a pay wall, but it appears this commentary can be accessed by non-subscribers.
