Media critics as disparate as former CNN head honcho turned would-be blogger Eason Jordan and Blogosphere vet Confederate Yankee have both delivered fresh, direct hits this week regarding the world's most mysterious policeman, Iraq's Jamil Hussein.

How does AP Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll respond?

“she had not read Jordan’s latest item, posted Monday, and likely would not. But she stood by the news organization’s previous statements backing the existence of an Iraqi police captain, Jamail Hussein.”

So there. That’s responsible journalism in the 21st century; hands over the ears and “lalala, I can’t hear you! Just read what we write and shut the hell up.”

This is not new, of course. Just astonishingly arrogant and overt.

Curiously, the AP has not used Jamil Hussein as a source once since all of this began. Previously, they’d used him…oh, quite a lot.

The AP has watched its credibility metaphorically hacked off one piece at time in the last two months. As I've written before, lacking a superstar figure like Dan Rather at its epicenter, the Jamil Hussein scandal isn't anywhere near as high profile as Ra^therGate. But as Glenn Reynolds mentioned in a recent Pajamas Blog Week In Review podcast, events such as this one, and Reuters' somewhat similar "Picture Kill" moment add up, and if, in the coming years, AP's reporting is increasingly questioned and scrutinized, this moment, and Carroll's "circle the wagons" response will be looked back on as a critical juncture in its history.

And as Hugh Hewitt and Patterico note, in the information business, honesty can definitely reflect on the balance sheet.