Interview with A Concerned Citizen (Swindled)
Happy New Year! What better way to kick off a new year than with a new addition to the blog? This is something that has been in the pipeline for quite a while now, as I toyed with the why’s and wherefore’s. I wasn’t sure whether to just to include these as a newsletter to subscribers, or hide them behind some paywall to help cover costs. After talking to a friend, I decided to keep these as extra blog posts so everyone can read them. But anyway, enough of the preamble. Here is the inaugural interview on the The Podcast Geek.
Hi, thank you for taking the time to do this. I want to interview the most interesting people in the realm of podcasting, and to be honest, you really do qualify for that! This is actually the first interview that I’ll be posting on The Podcast Geek. I originally reviewed your show back in September 2024. Looking back now I felt I was a bit harsh, and since then Swindled has become one of those shows that I instantly play on release day.
Did you find it hard to break into the podcasting world? There are already shows exposing the dark side of capitalism, but how did you find this particular niche in the subject?
Honestly, I don’t remember it being all that difficult to get started. But only because I was incredibly lucky with the timing of everything. The first episode of Swindled was published in January 2018, and the podcasting landscape was a very different place back then. The industry was smaller, and I think the audience was more receptive and eager to discover something new. I’m not sure the same approach would work today.
Swindled is very well researched, and extremely diverse in subject matter. What made you choose this for a podcast? Was there some event that tipped you into making the show?
Thanks. There wasn’t a specific event that sparked it. It’s just always been a topic I’ve been passionate about. As a podcast fan, I went looking for something in that same vein and realized it didn’t really exist at the time. Especially not in the format in which I wanted it to. I already had all the requisite skills and experience to make a podcast, so I toyed with the idea for months, and somehow the concept, the artwork, the theme music all came together a bit too easy. That’s when it hit me, like, “Oh shit, I should actually try this.”
What is your background in journalism? I only ask because the show has an investigative style that seems different from similar shows.
None at all. My background is in accounting and finance. Any research skills I have are purely the result of being naturally obsessive. I rely on real journalists to do the heavy lifting. I’m almost never sharing anything that hasn’t already been publicly reported.
Following on from that, how do you decide on what story to cover? Do you have a huge archive of corruption and malpractice, or do you get tipped off about subject matter from the fans of the podcast?
All of the above. I keep a massive, categorized list of potential subjects and usually just pick whatever I feel like working on at the time. That’s why there’s so much variety. I have to keep it interesting for myself as much as for the audience, you know. Listeners send in a ton of tips and requests, too. Some get added to the list, others serve as helpful reminders to take a second look at something I may have forgotten or overlooked.
What was the hardest episode to make for you? There have been many that I have found hard to get through due to the subject matter. Was there one (or more than one) that you needed to take some time out after you created it?
There have definitely been a few that stuck with me. One that comes to mind is a bonus episode about an international ring of monkey torturers who created, commissioned, and traded videos of horrific animal abuse. That was one of the rare times I had to hold back on the research. That said, I don’t tend to dwell on the content. My coping mechanism, I think, is to clear my brain and move on to the next one. Probably not the healthiest approach, but it works.
Is there a case that you wouldn’t cover?
Sure, but not out of fear or anything like that. I get episode requests all the time that just don’t interest me personally, and working on them would feel like a chore.
Following on from that, have you ever had cause to either edit or delete an episode entirely due to pressure from people associated with the story?
Not yet!
You like to keep yourself fairly anonymous, and you mention that you don’t accept parcels through the post. Is that a genuine concern? It must get pretty tense with some of the companies you mention.
Yes and no. Originally, it was just a tongue-in-cheek way to keep people from sending me stuff I didn’t want. But over time, I’ve come to appreciate it as one of my better ideas.
Is there a worry that you could end up like Karen Silkwood (or any of the other people who shed light on this stuff)? Or do you think that the stories are historical enough to be relatively safe?
I suppose anything’s possible if you upset the wrong people. But like I said, everything on the podcast is already publicly available. I’m well-aware there’s some inherent risk in amplifying that information, but let’s be honest, there are bigger fish to fry. When an episode of Swindled starts moving stock prices, then I’ll start checking under my car.
Do you have any clues as to what you’ve got in store in the future? Be as vague or enigmatic as you like, I don’t want any spoilers!
More of the same! Sadly, there is no shortage of horrific, financially-driven scandals happening as we speak. I can’t even keep up.
And finally, why should people listen to the show? Hopefully my readers’ appetites have been whetted from these answers. Actually I hope that they already listen, but is there anything you would like to add?
Nope, but I appreciate you reaching out. Swindled has grown entirely through word of mouth, so whatever success it’s had is thanks to people like you who’ve shared it. Seriously, I’m grateful.
Thank you very much for your time. I look forward to hearing what you’ve got in store for us in the future.