Lede: LustCast wasn’t journalism; it was self-myth, call-to-action, and courtroom cosplay. Paul Mulholland didn’t just cover a story—he cast himself as protagonist, prosecutor, and martyr. That may juice clicks, but it guts the independence and verification journalism requires.

Section 1 — Mission Creep

Mulholland vows he won’t stop “until [the company] is shut down” and “a few of them were in prison,” while floating protests with Exodus Cry. That’s an explicit goal posture, not independence. It shifts the role from reporter to campaign operative.

Journalism standard implicated: Act independently. Reporters can cover activism; becoming the activism collapses the firewall and contaminates the frame.

Section 2 — Self as Story

The transcript is thick with first-person heroics—cat-and-mouse texts, being “discovered,” engagement metrics. Even his “ordinary porn consumption” and “intuition” become evidentiary scaffolding. That’s memoir energy, not method disclosure.

• Discovery drama: turns a fake-blog email misstep into narrative fuel.
• Metrics bragging: “100k engagements” framed as proof of salience—PR hat on.
• Intuition as engine: “I’m sure” and “to my eye” stand in for verification.

Rub: When the reporter’s ordeal is the spine, sources/evidence become props, not proof.

Section 3 — Evidence vs. Emotion

Where the record is thin, Mulholland substitutes vibe and moralizing:

1. Intoxication inference: Admits no opioid expert, but narrates on-camera impairment arc (“to my untrained eye”).
2. Causation creep: Disclaims proof on suicides, yet leans readers toward a cause-and-effect read via adjacency and prescription notes.
3. Standard inflation: Uses Kink’s code of conduct as if it were an industry-wide baseline.
4. Prevalence math: Floats a “5–10% red flags” estimate—no disclosed method, large rhetorical impact.

Journalism standards implicated: Seek truth & report it (verification), Be accountable & transparent (methods, limits).

Section 4 — Ethics & Harm

Boundary slippage shows up repeatedly: “keeping an eye” on a traumatized source who “doesn’t like to hear from me,” recounting a source flirting on a 2.5-hour call, and calling a subject “extraordinarily unintelligent.” This isn’t neutral—it’s entanglement plus ad hominem.

• Minimize harm: Don’t become part of the re-traumatization loop.
• Independence: Emotional over-identification and humiliation anecdotes undercut distance.
• Tone discipline: Insults weaken any later claim to clinical neutrality.

Section 5 — Why It Matters

When the reporter becomes the protagonist, evidence is relegated to supporting actor. Courts, regulators, and readers need a record that survives cross-examination—not a hero’s journey. Journalism isn’t courtroom cosplay. It’s documented facts, disclosed methods, and clean separation from the campaign you want to win.