By Jim Pumarlo

Election season is under way. Many would say the cycle never ends. No sooner are votes tallied than strategists eye the next election. Make no mistake, many lawmakers routinely cast votes with one eye on policy and one eye on politics, especially if they are in swing districts.

Office-holders are scrutinized more than ever in today’s political dynamics. In turn, media are under the microscope.

The scope of coverage will vary by newspaper and community. Election season strains newsrooms already strapped for resources. Consider these starting points:

First, keep the focus local. Do what you know best and do what no one else is doing for your readers.

Second, introduce yourselves early to candidates. Promote the roles of both the news and advertising departments.

I place public affairs coverage at the heart of a newspaper’s responsibilities. In that sphere, nothing is more than the selection of candidates who will shape policies affecting readers’ everyday lives.

Think about your bread and butter. What’s more likely to receive a front-page headline: An action in Washington, D.C. or at the State Capitol – or debate at a packed meeting of the city council, school board or county board?

I don’t suggest ignoring the more expansive conversations. Elections in Minnesota got much more interesting with the decision of Gov. Tim Walz not to seek a third term. The ripple effect will likely reach legislative races and even local contests, raising issues that warrant attention.

The increasingly caustic political environment at national and state levels has negatively influenced local political discourse, which has made some newspapers more cautious about giving space to broader topics. That makes it all the more important to shed light on local topics and candidates, offering a trusted voice to navigate the chaos of social media. And, when appropriate, to filter national and state issues for messages relevant to your communities.

The first step is to commit to comprehensive election coverage. The second step – carrying out that pledge – may prove difficult despite best intentions. Publishers more and more are frustrated with candidates and campaigns that simply refuge to engage with the newspaper, even declining to complete basic questionnaires. Even more annoying is the growing loss of advertising dollars.  

Your best offense is to get in front of candidates early. Individuals seeking elective office are applying for a job. They must convince their bosses – the electorate – that they are the most qualified to effectively advance constituent interests. You are in excellent position to help present that information in the clearest and most meaningful manner.

Start by writing a welcome letter congratulating candidates on their decision to seek elective office, for giving their time and talent to make the community a better place to live. Include answers to the most frequently asked questions about newspaper policies and operations. Follow up with a face-to-face meeting to communicate editorial procedures as well as advertising opportunities. It’s ideal to have separate conversations. In all cases, make clear the distinction between news and advertising departments.

Then underscore this is the candidate’s opportunity to be introduced to constituents, to state positions on priority issues. If you can’t interview them – if they won’t give you access, it is fair game to interview associates, supporters and others. Campaigns need treasurers. That can be a place to start.

On that front, publishers often bemoan the lack of political advertising, especially in local races. But how many newspapers develop and approach candidates with an advertising campaign similar to welcoming a new merchant in town? Many individuals are novices to the political arena. Seize the opportunity to be a key adviser in spreading their messages.

A final note: Communicate. I’m a firm believer in explaining newspaper operations and policies and wrote a weekly column while sitting behind the editor’s desk. Election season provides ample fodder on a variety of fronts. Some columns can be written each election cycle and can be pre-emptive on questions that inevitably will be raised.

Election coverage is one of the most exhaustive and scrutinized tasks facing newsrooms. At the same time, reporting on candidates and campaigns is the most fundamental element of a newspaper’s service to democracy in action.  Solid reporting helps voters elect better people to make decisions on their behalf.

Newspapers should use their community knowledge to deliver an inside look at candidates and set a framework for constructive debate. The rewards are to all involved from candidates and the voters to your community and your newspaper.

Jim Pumarlo is former editor of the Red Wing (Minn.) Republican Eagle. He writes, speaks and provides training on community newsroom success strategies. He is author of “Journalism Primer: A Guide to Community News Coverage,” “Votes and Quotes: A Guide to Outstanding Election Coverage” and “Bad News and Good Judgment: A Guide to Reporting on Sensitive Issues in Small-Town Newspapers.” He can be reached and welcomes comments and questions at jim@pumarlo.com.

Indiana Pro SPJ promotes and protects the First Amendment freedoms of every newsroom and reporter in Indiana. We offer year-round training and networking for current and future journalists. Indiana Pro SPJ also hosts the annual "Best in Indiana" journalism contest, which funds our college scholarship program.

If you do not already have a paid membership, join the Indiana Pro SPJ today to protect and support journalistic freedom and education across the state. Email indyprospj@gmail.com for more information.

Running a newspaper — especially in a small or solo operation — can be both deeply rewarding and incredibly challenging. Whether it’s finding the right resources, streamlining your operations, juggling staffing needs, or just figuring out what works, you don’t have to do it alone.

Join us for a friendly, informal monthly peer chat with other newspaper publishers from across Indiana. We’ll swap ideas, share questions, offer support, and connect each other with tools and tips that can make our work easier.

Who’s invited? Anyone in a leadership role at a newspaper organization that publishes in Indiana.

When: Mark your calendars for next month’s chat - May 6 at 2 p.m. ET.

Where: Zoom - Registration required each month:

https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/7fOpIfUnQc2m1AJs2VEIEQ

Bring your questions, your stories, and let’s help each other keep local news strong in Indiana.

Questions? Contact Chris Hardie (publisher of Western Wayne News in Wayne County) at chris@westernwaynenews.com or (765) 478-5448 x201.

2026 HSPA Journalism Contest Rules & Category Descriptions

View Contest Website

By Kris Cundiff 

In recent years, my colleagues and I at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press have noticed journalists are increasingly eager to have their stories vetted before publishing. Here in Indiana, I regularly provide free legal vetting, or pre-publication review, to help journalists get important stories out to their communities.

Ideally, every journalist would have access to an attorney to do this kind of work. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case. Due to limited resources, Reporters Committee attorneys can’t accept every client, and it can be hard to find media attorneys willing to provide these services for free. So a few years ago, my colleague Paul McAdoo, our Tennessee-based attorney, put together a handy list of tips for journalists who want to vet their own stories to reduce legal risk.

In this column, I wanted to pass along Paul’s tips. They’re a great guide to ensure your reporting is more likely to survive a lawsuit — and help you rest easier at night. As you’ll see, the pre-publication review process goes beyond your traditional editing and fact-checking routine. Some of these tips are good to keep in mind in your early stages of newsgathering, long before you sit down to type your first draft.

Be careful with confidential sources.

As any editor will tell you, named, on-the-record sources are almost always better than confidential sources. While confidential sources are sometimes crucial to telling a particular story, it’s best to use them with caution, especially when the subject of your reporting has the potential to file a libel lawsuit. Not only do confidential sources breed mistrust among some members of the public, but they can also put you in tricky legal situations.

For one thing, there are certain circumstances in which you could be forced to reveal the identity of a confidential source in court, a scenario every journalist wants to avoid. But successfully protecting your confidential source’s identity could end up complicating your ability to defend yourself against a libel suit, in part because you might not be able to call that person to testify on your behalf.

Seek requests for comment.

Contacting the subjects of your reporting for comment before publication might sound like a no-brainer, but journalists sometimes cut corners here. Legally speaking, it’s critical that you give the people you are writing about the chance to tell their side of the story, especially if the story accuses them of wrongdoing. This step helps demonstrate that your reporting is unbiased and could serve as an important defense in a libel lawsuit.

But the lengths to which you go to reach out for comment matters, too. If you’ve spent months reporting an investigative series about a local politician, it’s not enough to call the person an hour before publication for comment. In a situation like that, you should make multiple calls and send multiple emails that clearly explain what your story is about and why you would like the person to comment. And you should give them sufficient time to respond.

Whatever the response — even if it’s just a “no comment” or that they didn’t respond to requests for comment — be sure to include that in your story.

Consider whether the subjects of your story are public officials/figures or private figures.

Public officials (governors, mayors) and public figures (corporate leaders, celebrities) must prove what’s known as “actual malice” to prevail in a libel suit. In other words, they must establish that you knew or strongly suspected that a statement you published was false when you made it.

That’s a much higher legal bar than the one that applies to private figures, who can succeed in a libel lawsuit merely by showing that a false statement that injured their reputation was made with negligence. Because actual malice is widely misunderstood, my colleagues at the Reporters Committee have published a helpful explainer.

Rely on official documents and proceedings as much as possible.

Under what’s known as the “fair report privilege,” you are protected from liability if you fairly and accurately report on government records, official proceedings, court documents, and official statements made by public officials. Be sure to state in your story when information you are relying on is attributable to official documents or actions so that it’s clear that the fair report privilege applies.

As always, if you have legal questions, reach out to me at kcundiff@rcfp.org. For more information, check out the Reporter’s Committee’s Guide to Pre-Publication Review.

Kris Cundiff is the Indiana Local Legal Initiative attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. He lives just outside of Indianapolis