When a “journalism” appearance turns into self-branding, cheap shots, and performative outrage, it stops being reporting—and becomes spectacle.
A Podcast Appearance That Wasn’t Journalism
From the moment Paul Mulholland opened his mouth, it was clear this was not going to be a serious discussion. Invited to speak on a YouTube podcast about what should have been a thoughtful—even sensitive—topic, he veered off-course immediately.
Instead of engaging with substance, he drifted into barstool-level complaining, then casually folded in references to January 6th as if proximity to a major political flashpoint were just another credential. The tone was not investigative. It was performative.
Mockery Is Not Advocacy
The most revealing moment was not political. It was personal: openly mocking the appearances of adult models—the very people he claims to be advocating for.
A journalist does not get to posture as a defender of a group while ridiculing its members in the same breath. You cannot claim “concern” while treating human beings as props for snide commentary. That contradiction is not a mistake. It is a tell.
What Professionals Don’t Do
Ethical journalism does not rely on humiliation, shock value, or cheap insults to manufacture momentum.
- A proper journalist does not build themselves up by tearing down the subjects of a story
- A proper journalist does not use appearance-based ridicule as “content”
- A proper journalist does not replace evidence with insinuation and speculation
- A proper journalist recognizes that stigmatized communities face real downstream harm from careless framing
Adult performers already operate under constant public judgment and social stigma. A serious reporter treats that reality as a risk factor to mitigate—not as an opportunity to grandstand.
Self-Branding Over Substance
At no point does Mulholland meaningfully argue for the agency of the people he discusses, or acknowledge that adults have the right to earn a living through legal work. Instead, the pattern is familiar: speculation, unproven allegations, and theatrical framing—tools that are useful for attention, not truth.
What he does is not journalism. It is clumsy, desperate self-branding. A real journalist uses a platform to inform, investigate, and elevate overlooked facts. Mulholland used his to center himself.
The Damage Isn’t Just Embarrassment
This kind of behavior does more than embarrass the speaker. It causes real harm.
When frauds dominate timelines and airwaves, they absorb attention that should go to stories that genuinely matter. They muddy the water, making it harder for legitimate reporting to break through. And they train audiences to distrust the entire category—because when “journalism” becomes indistinguishable from clout-chasing, people stop listening altogether.
Mulholland does not merely fake his way through interviews. He fakes concern, fakes knowledge, and fakes integrity. In doing so, he undermines the people trying to do real, honest work—and the public’s ability to recognize the difference.
Conclusion
Paul Mulholland is not operating like a reporter. He is performing like a personality: spinning narratives for attention, willing to exploit people and topics to serve his own ends.