Did Jonathan Karl Get Played? Or Did He Know the Lie Was a Lie?

Jay Rosen reviews the saga of ABC News’s Jonathan Karl and the fabricated email about Benghazi talking points, and says Karl got played by his source. But at FAIR, Peter Hart makes a strong case that Karl was a right-wing mole all along.

Karl has been disingenuous about his bogus reporting, and I believe ABC has yet to acknowledge what happened.

5 thoughts on “Did Jonathan Karl Get Played? Or Did He Know the Lie Was a Lie?

  1. If he knew he was being fed bad info, then he heeds to be fired.

    And even if he didn’t know, he needs to be told that the continuation of his employment will depend on him outing his “source” – who was no “source,” but a person with an agenda.

    If I was a fellow reporter, I’d be calling Karl and demanding that he out his “source.”

    I’d want to know who s/he is, just in case I ever have that person as my “source,” and I’d know I’ll need to check that information with some other, more independent, more reliable, “source.”

  2. Yeah, ….”And the pen became a clarion” He knew the lie was a lie, and he’s guilty through association. They’re all the spawn of Buckley! With a pedigree like Karl’s getting played doesn’t even enter into the equation when you consider the nature of the story.

  3. Amazing Karl came out of something called the “Intercollegiate Studies Institute” It’s telling that the right-wingers need to have carefully planned and years long propaganda operations to get the bullshit they are selling accepted, it never just happens!

  4. Amazing Karl came out of something called the “Intercollegiate Studies Institute”

    Aka known as the den of vipers. Look at the alumni list.. I erroneously referred to it as the Malkin School of Journalism, but I find out now that Lulu was just a graduate. I’m sure that chiseled in deep relief upon the architrave of the institute’s main entrance are the words…ABANDON ALL TRUTH YE WHO ENTER HERE

  5. I think the time has passed when one could credibly consider Karl an innocent victim here. He’s had plenty of time since he would have realized he’d been “played” by his alleged source, and he certainly hasn’t been acting the way and saying the things one would expect an objective journalist to act and say. He doesn’t seem angry, and has had to have an apology pulled out like a tooth. I’d say he was at least happy to suspend objective skepticism about his source, and may well have been happy to spread disinformation in the cause of conservative politics.

Comments are closed.