Two events occurring on opposites ends of the world bring into question the legality and the ethics of embedded journalism. What is the link between Don Lemon and the mysterious Ali Mahmud?

Don Lemon

Former CNN host Don Lemon has been in the news as of late. It is said by some in the field of journalism that the objective is to report the news, not be the news. Don Lemon may have crossed the line when he followed a band of protesters into Cities Church in Minneapolis, disrupting their worship service on January 18^th. Twelve days later, the Department of Justice arrested Lemon for his involvement in the event. He was released by the judge on personal recognizance.

I must admit as a conservative libertarian that my immediate reaction was uncertainty. What makes his actions different from Andy Ngo or Nick Sortor or Nick Shirley? These are all part of the new breed of “journalism.” It is raw footage. Not much commentary. Just explaining what is in front of you. The T-Sply YouTube channel is replete with this sort of journalism. The narrator diligently credits his sources, most of whom are young and very brave. So is Don Lemon like them in some respect?

Back in 2024 I wrote an article titled “The Art of Massacre,” where I discussed the ethical tension of awarding a photographer for images of the murder, rape and abduction of Jews by Hamas on October 7, 2023. The same questions pertain to Don Lemon. For one, both were following a group of protagonists who were engaging in illegal activity. Given, the protesters in the church were by no stretch of the imagination the equivalent of anything as evil as Hamas. But they were violating one of the bedrock principles of our constitution – the right to worship. It is for this reason that the Department of Justice is investigating this case as a civil rights infringement, in which Lemon is caught in the middle. (See video below).

One of the advantages of a court case is that all the facts will need to be put out onto the table for a case to proceed. It will be ironic if the “facts” that are presented involve what Lemon was filming. I have observed this from the beginning, that some of the best footage of the event are from Lemon’s cameraman. What will cause Lemon difficulty, however, will be any evidence of foreknowledge or empathetic commentary during the event. His attempt to interview people afterward was the very definition of awkward.

As MSN Reported:

…. Don Lemon also remarked on the protesters and Lemon interjected:

“Listen, there’s a constitution, the First Amendment to freedom of speech and freedom to assemble and protest.”

The pastor replied:

“We’re here to worship Jesus because the hope of the world is Jesus Christ.”

Lemon questioned whether the pastor had tried to talk to the crowd. He [the pastor] stated:

“No one is willing to talk. I have to take care of my church and my family so I ask that you would also leave this building.”

Later, Don Lemon also remarked on the protesters and worshipers at the church and said:

“This shows you how divided America is. When you look at the protesters here and then you look at the people there are praying. And you know what’s interesting thing, that these two groups could just get together. They might figure out what to do.”

From what I have seen so far, I am not certain Lemon can or should be prosecuted. He may be a fool I will never agree with, but we must recognize there is a lot of controversial and questionable forms of journalism that have traditionally been provided free sailing in our republic. As I stated in “The Art of Massacre”, we learned a great deal about the Holocaust and the rise of Hitler from what pro-Hitler sympathizers filmed. Do we shoot the messenger?

The Ethics of Journalism

It is hard to imagine for some, but there is such a thing as “ethical journalism.” One of the fundamental principles of journalism is to report the facts. But embedded journalism? This is where there is a gray area. Two cases are now before us. One the one hand, there is the case of Ali Mahmud, an embedded photographer with Hamas. Is it reasonable to reward such a man, recognizing his work as the highest standard of photojournalism? On the other hand, we have Don Lemon. Is his conduct construed as journalism?

This is not just a matter of legality. As any who follow journalism can attest, good journalism can be construed as illegal. Not all countries see journalists in the same light. But within the profession itself, is there a standard on what is construed as journalism? I am sure there is, but the manner in which it is practiced indicates that there is no consensus and, in some sense, no moral or ethical framework. Don Lemon, in that respect, represents much of what is wrong in journalism. He is not a reporter. He is heavily biased and he is quite liberal with the “facts.” But how would the Missouri School of Journalism look at Don Lemon given the manner in which they recognize the likes of Ali Mahmud for “excellence” in photojournalism?

Ali Mahmud

On October 7, 2023, Ali Mahmud¹ accompanied Hamas terrorists that raided a campground filled with mostly young people who were celebrating the Jewish holiday Sukkot by attending an open air rock festival. He would witness and photograph the murder of 378 people, plus be present while countless more were raped, severely beaten and/or abducted. One photograph, showing the unconscious body of Shani Louk in her underwear, would earn photo of the year from the Donald W. Reynolds Journalism Institute (RJI), connected with the University of Missouri School of Journalism.

Being that there is no photo of Ali Mahmud, Mahmud II will fill in

The response was understandable. Disgust to say it mildly. The firestorm of criticism poured upon the Missouri School of Journalism was brutal. A local TV station, KRCG, reported their official response provided by the Director of Photojournalism, Lynden Steele.

The Reynolds Journalism Institute and Pictures of the Year strongly condemn the Hamas attack on October 7, and we continue to mourn the loss of innocent lives and human suffering that is occurring in the ongoing conflict. Reactions to the team Picture Story of the Year express the greater emotions related to that conflict. This year and every year, the photos in the competition are selected by a panel of professional journalists tasked with identifying compelling representations of the significant news events of the year. While we understand the reactions to the pictures, we also believe that photojournalism plays an important role in bringing attention to the harsh realities of war.

My efforts to get RJI’s perspective on the ethics of being an “embedded” photographer to a massacre have yet to produce a response.

It appears that a similar inquiry was put forth by the FDD², declaring that the award was “Journalism as a Cover for Terror.”

Shani Louk?

So what happened to the subject of this award winning photo, Shani Louk? Months later it would be confirmed that she did not survive the encounter. Her body was found in a tunnel in the ruins of Gaza.

The paradox surrounding Mahmud’s photograph is demonstrated by Shani’s parents. On the one hand, her father stated that the photo award was a good thing. It shocked the world into focusing on the barbarity suffered by the Jews. And it was evidence. Not long after, her parents and others would be suing the AP and Reuters for paying Mahmud and several other Palestinian “journalists” who were alleged to be embedded agents of Hamas.

Back to Mahmud

Ali Mahmud is one amongst many who are being sued by the victims of October 7^th. Some have called the effort a smear campaign.

From the first weeks after October 7, Israel systematically sought to link Palestinian journalists to Hamas to justify its genocidal war in Gaza, even suggesting that many of the enclave’s most prominent journalists — including Hassan Aslih, AP’s Ali Mahmud, and Mohammed Abu Mostafa from Reuters — had foreknowledge of the attacks or were “embedded with Hamas” during them. Israeli ministers called for deeming those journalists “terrorists” and dealing with them accordingly. — +972 Magazine

Although it was stated that the parents were suing the AP and Reuters, nothing has been found to confirm that. But what is interesting is this key phrase: “foreknowledge of the attacks.” Sound familiar? Don Lemon may be put on trial for that very thing, having foreknowledge of the event.

Regarding Hassan Eslaiah (possibly the same as Hassan Aslih mentioned above), there is evidence he had a prior history of activity affiliated with Hamas, and it is argued that much of what he did was serving as a propagandist for Hamas. He was also a target, eventually succumbing to wounds from a bombing attack in Gaza. Which brings us back to Don Lemon. His commentary during the church event brings into question his objectivity. Was he a propagandist? Once again, it gets muddy. Lemon made a career from news commentary. Even under the best of circumstances, it is difficult for a journalist to make the transition back from commentary to simply news reporting. Could you imagine Tucker Carlson being reborn as a beat reporter?

Another “correspondent” died opposing IDF soldiers who were in the process of rescuing hostages held in his home.

IN A war full of misreporting and anti-Israel bias, the iconic journalist may end up being Abdallah Aljamal, the Gaza correspondent for the Palestine Chronicle, who was killed as the IDF rescued three Israeli hostages he was holding in his home.

The AP was also accused of paying Issam Adwan.

Operation Swords of Iron began with Associated Press (AP) coverage from Issam Adwan, whose byline hasn’t been seen since media watchdog HonestReporting revealed on October 11 that he had called publicly, in English, for the annihilation of Israel and compared Israel to the Nazis.

Then there was The New York Times hiring Soliman Hijjy.

The New York Times rehired Soliman Hijjy on October 8, despite being aware that his Arabic social media posts praised Adolf Hitler.

CNN, to their credit, fired Hassan Eslaiah.

However, HonestReporting has revealed 20 such “journalists” from six top media outlets, which means it’s a feature, not a bug, with journalism. Eight of them have worked for Reuters, including Yasser Qudih, who infiltrated Israel on Oct. 7 and was honored by Hamas. He went on to win the 2024 Pulitzer Prize with other Reuters photography staff.

Suhaib Jadallah Salem, Mohammed Jadallah Salem, Fadi Shanaa, and Ibraheem Abu Mustafa have all received awards from Hamas. However, Reuters did not take any disciplinary action.

AP STILL employs seven journalists who either infiltrated Israel or collaborated with terror groups.

Some saw Mahmud’s work not as photographic art, but as psychological warfare. Hmm – Triumph of the Will?³

As one would state later in The Jerusalem Post,

“The “journalist’s cloak,” which many rely on to protect them from prosecution, should not provide immunity from criminal culpability.

Hmm – sounds like our Department of Justice against Don Lemon.

Conclusion

It is remarkable that the church protest ended without violence. Christians will generally apply the Biblical principles they follow, choosing to pray, to not respond in kind. But there is also a grim reality within which Christians worship these days. I have regularly attended five churches over my adult life. All of them have had someone who is armed, prepared to respond to the worst-case scenario. Let me repeat. All of them. In almost every case, it was a local, state or federal law enforcement officer. The protesters who marched into that church in Minneapolis were quite fortunate. And, to their credit, they left the sanctuary without police involvement.

As regards the photos posted by the RJI, getting some distance from the shock of the award being given to Mahmud, I returned to view the photos once again. After looking over the library of pictures contending for photo of the year, all but the first one by Mahmud were simply raw pictures of the devastation of war. What is unique about Mahmud’s photo was that he was recording an act of terror. It is indeed ironic that if October 7^th had never happened, all those other photos would have never been taken.

I must say that after viewing the horrific pictures of Oct 7^th and the images of Shani Louk, I am deeply grieved. Words can’t describe these events. Only pictures. The irony of her image being iconicized by the RJI is that Shani Louk is the face of Oct 7^th.

Regarding the RJI, a search for “Ali Mahmud” or “Ali Mahmoud” or “Shani Louk” produces nothing, not even a “tag” (webpages can be assigned key words to aid search engines). Ironic. Both perpetrators and victims remain nameless.

Don Lemon is tied in some respects to Mahmud, Lemon is facing a trial within the bounds of the American justice system. Mahmud is being pursued through various avenues in several countries. In the center is the RJI and the Missouri School of Journalism. How does this reflect on how people view journalists?