36 votes

Jonathan Karl, ABC NEWS TV commentator on Journalism

Jonathan Karl ABC NEWS TV commentator on Journalism and his reluctance to offer his opinions. He will not share his opinions even though he is a TV commentator. Would it be more honest to simply tell us what his views are instead of pretending he has no views? Are his views implied in his questions? How can we examine the reasoning on which his views are based if he will not tell us what his views are? How can the viewers consider the reasoning he uses support his opinions if he does not tell us what his opinions are, much less the reasoning? These are some of the questions considered in this interview. Watch his facial expressions.


Jan Helfeld is a unique TV interviewer who uses the Socratic interviewing technique to reveal contradictions in our politicians' thinking.

Unbelievable, dramatic, explosive interviews.

Watch Jan Helfeld nail the politician or journalist of your choice. Enjoy watching politicians and journalists go crazy as the result of rational, legitimate questions and thus, with no excuse to be upset.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Jan, I love the interviews

Jan, I love the interviews and have for years now. I am flattered that you have joined our community here, also. Welcome.


Jan Helfeld interviews are excruciating, even if you agree with the point he's trying to make.

Interviews are for celebrities. We need debates.

It would be cool to have short debates on the MSM instead of being asked stupid questions about a person's opinion, with no second thoughts on the answer they give. The commentators should try to prove Ron Paul wrong.

I like his method of questioning...

... I just wish he would ask them questions as to their opinion as to why Ron Paul does not get coverage, use the same Socratic method to reveal that it is blatant.

He struck Jan...see that!

He struck Jan...see that! Thats assault man. lol

- Brennan

Jonathan Karl

appeared to enjoy the interview. To him this was an intellectual challenge. how to keep from answering a question that he clearly felt might injure his status as a balanced reporter were it to get back to his employers.

Jonathan obviously considered Jan a peer and was not at all made to look foolish. Jan was trying to determine if personal opinions create bias in reporting events. To me that is a self evident truth but in the case of the controlled media it is irrelevant.

Let me say something that I believe at this point. It is not the reporters that create the news. It is the producers and the editors. The reporters provide the raw material but that is sliced and diced the way the producer or editor wants it to be presented.

We also know that all the news presenters many of them "infobabes", as Alex Jones calls them, are simply reading news from teleprompters created for them by the production and editorial staff. It is these behind the scenes roles that are controlled by the intelligence agencies and certain organisations who provide talking points to the producers many of whom are gatekeepers for the elites.


"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Yup Yup Yup!!!

I want to thumbs up what you just wrote.

Yeah, what's up with the lack

Yeah, what's up with the lack of comment-rating on some of these threads?


What you are doing is absolutely BRILLIANT!!!
Keep doing it! Expose them!

I'm not a fan of this interview approach.

This borders on badgering. Jan asks the same question over and over. His motive is obvious to anyone with half a brain. Its a weak attempt at a "gotcha" that almost never works.

If we rave about this guy, we aren't helping our cause.

Those are my two cents.

Ignore the media's lies and propaganda.


It's embarrassing to watch. And the viewer isn't embarrassed for the interview subject, but for this Jan guy. He's not trying to have a discourse, or, worse, he considers hearing his own repetitiveness a "discourse." If Jan's object is to get pro-Paul folks to love him, I guess it could work. But what sort of goal is that? I find him tedious.

I would have to agree, he

I would have to agree, he needs to ask several other questions. This guy he was interviewing was nice and going along with it. But yes, I believe he needs to broaden his questions a bit.

Go deeper bro,

You are failing to recognize the technique here, it's not the obvious...
Jan is doing a GREAT service to our cause.

While it is somewhat entertaining in a way

I agree

"If we lose freedom here there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth." -Ronald Reagan

When they took us off the Gold Standard they took away our money... in order to make it theirs. -OneTinSoldier

I'm stunned

that these people still give Jan interviews. Do they not know who he is when the sit down? I love it, but I'm just surprised he still gets so many interviews when he almost always makes the subject look like a fool.

He's the thinking man's Ali G

And obviously they don't know who he is, because they sit down expecting a "standard interview" and are caught completely off-guard. Don't they even think to use a search engine to get some idea what to expect? Maybe they're just so accustomed to doing essentially the same interview over and over and over that they don't think they need to bother, because for the most part the interviewers are all interchangeable.

Opinions implied in questions and reporting is true.

I have always thought that there is more integrity and transparency in a journalist for being upfront and honest about their opinions because the readers will then be able to understand the reasons for asking and framing the questions in the way that they do. Otherwise, I see it as manipulative and deceitful. One can still have opinions and attempt to be objective. The readers will be able to decide if it is or not. Stop hiding it.

Opinions are implied in the questions and reporting. That is the truth. To hide it is to hide truth from readers. I prefer knowing.

Great interview questions. I wish for more of this kind of exposure! I subbed your youtube channel.

Ha ha ha...

When faced with an honest question, it is interesting to see what a difficult time dishonest people have with their attempts to avoid an honest answer. As Jan Helfeld says, they already let it be known what their opinions are by their questions and why did Jonathan Karl feel the need to use London media as an example of bias when the bias in the media in this country as an example will clearly suffice? So sick of the dishonest getting paid to lie to the public and the rampant ignorance of the viewers who still buy into what these people are telling them. I love Mr. Helfeld's interviews, he is a true journalist.

Anyone who won't admit that

Anyone who won't admit that Fox pushes Republicans and MSNBC pushes Democrats has no spine. Whether or not Fox is actually conservative depends on how you define conservative.

"Where liberty is, there is my country." -Benjamin Franklin


a good fight.
One of the view, who can "battle" on an equal footing...

my Ron Paul video collection:

(4 years RP, over 2300 videos)