Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
I am the victim of Republican censorship.
I don’t like it, and I do not get it.
Let me explain.
Robert Vane, a public relations professional and former GOP political operative, conducts a podcast called “Leaders and Legends.” It’s a solid podcast with a strong following. It does profiles of people who are prominent in Indiana and around the world. Occasionally, when he talks with political figures, he asks me to co-host, and he did so recently when he interviewed Indiana Senate President Pro Tem Rod Bray. Bray knew I would be there, and he approved.
Days before the podcast, Vane and the communications person for Bray spoke and agreed to avoid the topic of redistricting.
Vane, in turn, asked me to avoid it. I said no. Journalistic ethics would not allow it. Vane tells me that he informed the Bray camp that he could not guarantee I would follow their wishes.
(The podcast recording took place on Aug. 28, when redistricting plans were unclear.)
When we were in the middle of the recording, after I had established that Bray had recently held two meetings with Vice President JD Vance and one with President Trump, the people pushing redistricting in Indiana, I asked two questions related to the subject. They were not tough questions, and they were asked in a civil tone.
Me: “Do you have a position on redistricting?”
Bray: “We have heard the ask, and we are considering it.”
Me: “Do you know when a decision will be made?”
Bray: “We have heard the ask, and we are considering it.”
His body language was more telling. He recoiled like he wanted to curl up in a ball. It was clear that he would repeat his canned answer to any follow-up question, so I moved on.
After the recording concluded, Bray and his communications person made it clear that redistricting was not what the senator wanted to talk about. And so, I gave them my reasoning. I told them what I had told Vane the day before: “I’m a member of the Indiana Journalism Hall of Fame, and if I didn’t ask that question, they would come and take the plaque away.” Hyperbole, maybe, but that is how it should work.
After the podcast was recorded (and before it was posted on Sept. 8), Vane and the senator’s communications person spoke again. They agreed that the redistricting questions and answer would be edited from the podcast. And they were removed.
I am OK with Vane protecting his business by satisfying the Republican leader of the Senate. He is not a journalist, and he tells people his podcast is meant to be a conversation, not an interrogation.
However, I do not understand an elected leader being afraid to answer the question of the day, especially when he was allowed to get by with a non-answer. He ran for that office. Voters deserve answers.
I’m left to assume that the honest response to my question was that Bray opposed redistricting but feared being placed in the position where he must shepherd a redistricting bill through the Senate. He did not want to go on record for or against the idea until he knows what the outcome will be.
Allowing the interview to be censored is spineless, and I thought you should know.•
__________
Shella hosted WFYI’s “Indiana Week in Review” for 25 years and covered Indiana politics for WISH-TV for more than three decades. Send comments to [email protected].
Click here for more Forefront columns.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
When legislators have largely protected themselves from the consequences of their actions, they are free to act without repercussions.
Bray and his handler were wanting to avoid any chance of the MAGA CULT dear leader getting irked at them for expressing any reluctance to fully comply with his edict .
Thank you for asking the question and then sharing your experience with us. Your transparency is valuable to us.