Japan Today
entertainment

YouTube cuts off Russell Brand's ad revenues after sexual assault allegations

96 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2023.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


96 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Russell Brand's supposed past immorality and self-admitted womanizing ways didn't stop the BBC saluting him for it and treating him as a political darling, it didn't stop The Guardian giving him top billing by publishing his column for many years, it didn't stop left-wing Ed Biliband seeking his endorsement as UK Prime Minister, it didn't stop Prospect Magazine naming him the 4th most influential thinker in the world.

If Brand is the supposed ruthless predatory criminal the media Is suddenly making him out to be, the executives at Channel Four and the BBC have some even more serious questions to answer.

5 ( +19 / -14 )

In the realms of learned prosecution counsel, Russel Brands My Booky Wook, memoir published 2007 may weave the rope that could eventually hang him.

“As I escorted Michaela [a lap dancer who slapped him after sex] through the front door, I felt very strongly that I needed to avenge the slap . . . I spat in her face.” – My Booky Wook

“What kind of man was I? Treating women in this way? If this is what I’m telling you, can you imagine what’s being left out?” – Booky Wook 2

With the prospect of a criminal trial ...

Russell Brand case will quote be heard by a judge and a jury. The judge will give directions about how the trial should run. The jury decides whether or not the defendant is guilty.

???

The conviction rate in England and Wales was 83.6 percent in magistrates courts and 77.9 percent in crown courts,

How we prosecute rape

https://www.cps.gov.uk/about-cps/how-we-prosecute-rape

1 ( +7 / -6 )

I’m so happy to see his downfall.

-7 ( +13 / -20 )

If the first low life report the alleged allegations there would be no other alleged allegations. These woman coming out of wood work now to report their alleged rape are low life opportunists even if it is fact. These women were able to stop these so called raping of more woman but decided it was not worth the bother back then.

-2 ( +16 / -18 )

If the first low life report the alleged allegations there would be no other alleged allegations. These woman coming out of wood work now to report their alleged rape are low life opportunists even if it is fact. These women were able to stop these so called raping of more woman but decided it was not worth the bother back then.

Probably terrified of internet commentators such as yourself deciding that victim blaming is the correct course of action.

3 ( +17 / -14 )

Russell Brand's supposed past immorality and self-admitted womanizing ways

He was a comedian. Most people thought he was joking. Now he is accused of serious crimes. Nobody is laughing.

Do you see the difference? Do you want all comedians investigated because of something they say?

I can’t stand Brand but will defend his right to a fair trail.

If Brand is the supposed ruthless predatory criminal the media Is suddenly making him out to be, the executives at Channel Four and the BBC have some even moreserious questions to answer.

I think the accused rapist has more serious questions to answer than those who employed him.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

A case such as this needs clear evidence and a thorough careful investigation.

Muddying the waters with claims that the media are trying to silence him, the women are gold diggers, that he was friends with jimmy saville etc are prematurely foolish.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Brand will use his brand to weather the storms. Never heard a bloke talk so much in my life. What’s interesting is that no one came for him when the actual incidents were said to have occured because he back then was the darling of the left, a naughty little superstar living the rock n roll hedonistic lifestyle. Running around like a lunatic and being celebrated for it.

Now that he has settled down, has a wife and kids and his politics has taken a shift it’s game on. The daggers are out, they are coming Russel! No one leaves the team and gets away with it!

2 ( +15 / -13 )

Now that he has settled down, has a wife and kids and his politics has taken a shift it’s game on. The daggers are out, they are coming Russel! No one leaves the team and gets away with it!

I don’t believe this.

But if it is true I would certainly prefer a ‘team’ that tries to punish sex offenders, however late, rather than a team that voted someone who proclaimed proudly to grab women by the you know what to the highest position in the world.

If you want to talk in terms of ‘teams’ that is.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

What’s interesting is that no one came for him when the actual incidents were said to have occured because he back then was the darling of the left, 

A much more likely reason is that the accusations were not made at that time, you can't expect people to call for him to be punished for something he had not yet been accused of doing.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Shouldn't they find out if he's guilty or not first before cutting off his revenue?

22 ( +26 / -4 )

Yildiray: Victim blaming? And you know for a fact these women are victims. Not proven. If true just remember to next raped women could be you daughter all because of a thought of social Media pressures. Try explaining that to your daughter that due the social media pressure the girl before you got rape did not report the rapist and in doing so as allow the rapist to roam free to rape you a week after. These women need to be reminded and drill into them always report a rape because the rapist just continues on raping until reported or caught.

-11 ( +7 / -18 )

And you know for a fact these women are victims. Not proven.

But you know they are ‘lowlife opportunists’. I see.

These women need to be reminded and drill into them…

What’s the timeline between being a victim of rape and a lowlife opportunist? When’s your cutoff date?

I think the victim of a rape knows better than you how and when they wish to deal with it.

6 ( +15 / -9 )

Isn't cutting off his ad revenue similar to firing someone for allegations, not an actual conviction? Should people at his workplace all the way up also be fired and not given pensions and other benefits (usually the higher ups)?

6 ( +13 / -7 )

Accusations are just that, to cancel this guy, hang him out to dry like the press have done is unfair. YouTube cancelling his income stream based on unfounded accusations. If you’re attacked or assaulted report it to the police don’t go crying to some low life reporter!

2 ( +17 / -15 )

It was reported he didn't use YT much anymore because they kept removing his conspiracy BS so he moved to another goober site where he could profit from idiots.

-1 ( +12 / -13 )

Regardless of what you think of Brand (or Donald Trump) and what he has done, it is scary that any media or social media organization can instantly cancel someone. Zuckerberg, Musk, Bezos, ... do not deserve that much power.

My own (essentially irrelevant) feelings on this are the BBC and C4 knew Brand was dodgy (workplace sexual harrassment for starters) but gave him a free rein, essentially enabling him, because he made them too much money. After years of major public realm organizations doing this, it strikes me as ludicrous to now be rushing to judge Brand and take instant action against him.

8 ( +17 / -9 )

Many comments here about the time lapses between the alleged crimes and reporting them. It is not that long ago that police almost everywhere never took these 'crimes' seriously and in most cases dismissed them, hence why so many girls/women did not report them, because even if they did it would amount to nothing. Rape and abuse and misogyny has been with us for centuries, and in many countries it is alive and thriving.

3 ( +12 / -9 )

Brand went down the conspiracy nut rabbithole on purpose. He knew it was coming eventually and he wanted a rabid following to defend him.

The carefully timed video before the charges were released put focus on 'mainstream media.' And now his nutjob following is screaming it was the fault of the tv companies, rather than that Brand is a serial rapist(alleged.)

4 ( +15 / -11 )

This is what happens to those who go after the powers that be.

3 ( +18 / -15 )

This is what happens to those who go after the powers that be.

They have to take responsibility for their actions? that seems to be a perfectly positive development

3 ( +13 / -10 )

Conveniently, this is all because of what he said on the Bill Maher show.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

"If a creator's off-platform behavior harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action to protect the community," a YouTube spokesperson said.

Sounds pretty ambiguous and could capture any annoying person.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Brand is a breath of fresh air on Youtube. He is spot on with regard to his analysis of the world, which clearly does not lean in favor of the left. Thus, he is most likely being attacked and discredited.

-1 ( +18 / -19 )

Why, to this day, do we really know anything about the charades of Epstein, yet Brand is the now biggest villain for the moment? I just wish people would think critically.

0 ( +16 / -16 )

Let me clarify, Epstein is infinitely worse that Brand even if the latter did what is alleged. Why aren't you asking for more information on the former? This boggles my mind.

-3 ( +14 / -17 )

I have never heard or read a single word by him. His past behavior is very suspect but until he is convicted he is innocent.

21 ( +21 / -0 )

A decade goes by, one of the supposed victims continued to meet with him for months afterwards. But we’re told to “believe all women” so a mere allegation will cancel him. A tactic of the left so brazen they don’t even try hard to hide it anymore.

4 ( +15 / -11 )

Ronin TsukebinToday  01:56 pm JST

Let me clarify, Epstein is infinitely worse that Brand even if the latter did what is alleged. Why aren't you asking for more information on the former? This boggles my mind.

How the left avoids this simple yet poignant question. NO RESPECT!

-7 ( +9 / -16 )

wallaceToday  02:02 pm JST

I have never heard or read a single word by him. His past behavior is very suspect but until he is convicted he is innocent.

Thank you for saying he is currently innocent. And what do you think of Epstein? It is right in front of our faces, clear as day.

As an aside, I know you know I was right about an earlier subject today.

-5 ( +10 / -15 )

He is spot on with regard to his analysis of the world, which clearly does not lean in favor of the left. Thus, he is most likely being attacked and discredited.

So the multiple rape allegations against musk, rogan and carlson are coming soon or does your conspiracy only involve Brand?

2 ( +13 / -11 )

So the multiple rape allegations against musk, rogan and carlson are coming soon or does your conspiracy only involve Brand?

We don't know anything yet, so we shouldn't speculate.

-4 ( +10 / -14 )

He is spot on with regard to his analysis of the world, which clearly does not lean in favor of the left. Thus, he is most likely being attacked and discredited.

So the multiple rape allegations against musk, rogan and carlson are coming soon or does your conspiracy only involve Brand?

Well, they are certainly putting much effort to find any dirt on all of them, or find anything that can be spun into dirt.

The first people these females report the alleged rape which is over a decade old was the media. No not the police but the media....So ten years latter these females turn to the media

Did they turn to the media, or did the media turn to them?

0 ( +11 / -11 )

The first people these females report the alleged rape which is over a decade old was the media. No not the police but the media. But these female say they were scare of what the media and the internet would portrait them as at that time.. So ten years latter these females turn to the media the same media which they were scare of.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

We don't know anything yet, so we shouldn't speculate.

Speculate that Brand is innocent and it’s all a leftist media ploy? You don’t need to tell me not to speculate.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

Ronin Tsukebin

wallace

Thank you for saying he is currently innocent. And what do you think of Epstein? It is right in front of our faces, clear as day.

Epstein wasn't found guilty of any crimes because he committed suicide. He was accused of child sex traffic, a crime very different from Brand who has been accused of raping women.

Epstein is now a closed case.

-2 ( +9 / -11 )

Haha By the way, what are your thoughts about Epstein vs Brand? Just curious to hear.

I’ve said it many times here and I’ll probably have to say it a many times more:

“Somebody else at some point in history was accused of the same crime” is not a smart or viable defense.

Focus on Brand.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

Trial by execution.

What a sad world we live in.

6 ( +16 / -10 )

It would seem Brand has tapped into a lucrative market, a veritable axis of idiocy.

What need is there for the academic endeavours of the human mind when a former MTV presenter can navigate us through the chaos of human existence and heal our weary souls with wellness weekends (225 quid) and completely original thoughts on topics that have never, ever been discussed anywhere else at all such as Ukraine, Big Pharma, Vaccines and the mainstream media.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

The women who accused Brand were in a consensual relationship with Brand...and all of them then broke up with or were left by him.

What's the difference between Brand and and breaking up with any other guy?- Brand is an easy mark that the press can make a fortune on by selling sensationalized stories because he is famous and outspoken.

6 ( +15 / -9 )

What's the difference between Brand and and breaking up with any other guy?

It's not because he sounds like a whiny Kenneth Williams.

four women had accused the 48-year-old of sexual assaults, including a rape, between 2006 and 2013.

What are we struggling with here ?

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

What's the difference between Brand and and breaking up with any other guy?

Seems like every promiscuous famous man has an X on his back. Better for them to marry and then when it is over the woman gets her money and the criminal lawsuits are avoided.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Once again, another man who is guilty until proven innocent.

I can't stand Brand and find him extremely annoying and unfunny but he's being proven guilty in the court of social media by accusations alone and no evidence.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

four women had accused the 48-year-old of sexual assaults, including a rape, between 2006 and 2013.

What are we struggling with here ?

Go ahead and actually read the details of what he is being accused of, with the knowledge that the accusers had slept with Brand numerous times.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Indeed.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

I don't like him but as far as I understand innocent until proven guilty, was how we once functioned.

Now it is guilty if just accused.

All those thinking this is a good thing, watch out, one day someone wanting to get a promotion and you are in the wayay just find it easier to make an accusation to get you out of the way.

This long debunked claim women don't make up this stuff was proven in multiple cases the most prominent and damaging was the Duke lacrosse case

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

This was before the hang them by social media before proof of trail and the damage was severe.

Today the best way to remove someone from a platform is to find someone that doesn't like them to make a claim.

Jordan Peterson had complaints made against him to the professional licensing board allegations of unprofessional behavior.

Until recently this was limited to patients.

But not anymore, people watching his interviews podcasts etc.. took offence and filed complaints, people he had never even met.

Big brother is watching and no one is now safe!

0 ( +8 / -8 )

These women should not be allowed to be Anonymous.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

If it’s true that he raped a woman then he goes to jail, but if like I believe it’s all fake, every single one of these women including the journalist and news media who lied should be jailed and fined millions of not billions of dollars for their actions

Never going to happen!

The Duke lacrosse case!

He announced that Mangum would not be prosecuted, stating that investigators and attorneys who had interviewed her thought "she may actually believe the many different stories that she has been telling ... it's in the best interest of justice not to bring charges".

The other reasoning given in that case and others was by prosecuting women that make false rape complaints to the police, this would discourage "real victims" from coming forward in other cases.

This has been the constant in such cases no penalties for false police reports or accusations because somehow that will discourage real victims.

Funny but in nearly all other crimes, people making false accusations get prosecuted and it doesn't seem to stop people from reporting those crimes.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

This has been the constant in such cases no penalties for false police reports or accusations because somehow that will discourage real victims.

That is not true in the UK, and this case is there. Women have been punished for falsifying rape and sexual assault.

One woman was jailed for 10 years.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/aug/24/woman-jailed-10-years-false-rape-claims-jemma-beale

There have been others.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Free speech is an expensive commodity.

In America, the Constitution protects it, and also that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

But the social media court of popular opinion now seems to be dictating the “law”, attaching limits to protected free speech through censorship, and canceling livelihoods without proof or conviction, of smear campaign accusations...

Russell Brand is you or I,

being ‘dealt’ with.

I stand with Russell Brand.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

I stand with Russell Brand.

Standing with rapey Russel. Well done.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Standing with rapey Russel. Well done.

Burn the witch! Burn the witch!

Social media has made people primitive again.

1 ( +8 / -7 )

N. Knight

Today 09:24 pm JST

I stand with Russell Brand.

Standing with rapey Russel. Well done

So you know for a FACT he did it, right?

I remember the Duke lacrosse case.

I watched people just like you go after anyone saying those boys needed a fair trial before being condemned.

Investigation and resolution of the case sparked public discussion of racism, sexual violence, media bias, and due process on campuses.

the boys were treated as guilty even before any arrest, prosecutor was eventually found guilty of misconduct, they boys to this day are still harrased one stating that the millions in settlement still are not enough to fix the damage done as people still make accusations based on not knowing the facts.

But I guess you were there when Russell did what you say he did, did you contact the police as an eyewitness?

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

Russell Brand is you or I,

being ‘dealt’ with.

There we go, the ‘they’re coming for you’ line.

Ill cross that bridge if I ever receive multiple rape accusations. Just be sure to throw out a few edgy posts the week before, then I can say I’m just standing in the way of the truth. No worries.

The funny thing is we are both actually defending Brand. Me because I believe he is innocent until proven guilty, you because…well, I’m not sure why. But, we are both defending him

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Well, that we don't know, so if you want to continue to speculate, go ahead.

ffs. That is my whole point. Keeerist almighty, scroll up.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

They can't prosecute a dead man.

They can the living though.

ffs. That is my whole point. Keeerist almighty, scroll up.

Relax and chill, I am just agreeing with you.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

The funny thing is we are both actually defending Brand. Me because I believe he is innocent until proven guilty, you because…well, I’m not sure why. But, we are both defending him

I don't know if Brand is guilty or not.

In addition, from what I've read, the charges seem manufactured

to insert doubt into Brand's brand; to make him less credible.

I'm defending his right to free speech, and that he's innocent till proven guilty.

I'm also seeing behavior patterns, and connecting dots.

People speak out all the time.

But go up against certain people, and there are repercussions.

I hope RB's voice is not canceled.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

I don't know if Brand is guilty or not.

Good start

In addition, from what I've read, the charges seem manufactured to insert doubt into Brand's brand; to make him less credible.

Bit wobbly

I'm defending his right to free speech, and that he's innocent till proven guilty.

Me too, back on track, back on track…

I'm also seeing behavior patterns, and connecting dots. People speak out all the time. But go up against certain people, and there are repercussions.

Ooooof. Abort abort!

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

I think some of you guys should be clear about whether they think he did it, before commenting on his right to a defense. Many of you sound like you are using his right to a defense as the male version of "believe men", whereby no guy can ever have raped.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Trump was on that island like 15 times, indeed.

And yet, and unlike in Clinton's case, if the Dems had something on Trump concerning Epstein we would have heard about it years ago. That is a gold nugget the Dems would never pass on. Clinton's travel records reveal that he took a minimum of 26 flights, surpassing the initially believed 11, on financier Jeffrey Epstein's Boeing 727 jet between 2001 and 2003, during the first two years following his presidency. Notably, on at least five of these flights, the former president traveled without his Secret Service detail.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2922773/Newly-released-flight-logs-reveal-time-trips-Bill-Clinton-Harvard-law-professor-Alan-Dershowitz-took-pedophile-Jeffrey-Epstein-s-Lolita-Express-private-jet-anonymous-women.html

I don't know if he can handle another felony at his age though.

Well, if they had something they would have nailed him with it.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

One woman offered her stories about Brand to the press. They weren't interested since her stories were positive and presented him as having a good character.

Anyway this is just one of the many things that make me hate youtube. I can't wait until Rumble has as much content since it does not run with this censorship crap, cancelling crap, and guilty until proven innocent crap.

Somebody ought to demonitize Youtube.

1 ( +9 / -8 )

Anyway this is just one of the many things that make me hate youtube. I can't wait until Rumble has as much content since it does not run with this censorship crap, cancelling crap, and guilty until proven innocent crap.

Somebody ought to demonitize Youtube.

I agree.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Strangerland

Good point, viewing the whole full C4 Dispatches and The Times/Sunday Times investigation, the testimonies, from the Women, alleged victims are convincing credible.

From an armchair, put in a spot, not only do i believe these women, I also suspect Brand has assaulted and harassed on numerous additional occasions.

Turning an assumption into a case that leads to conviction is another matter.

Another issue for me Brand is a detestable fellow, which will hardly endear rational judgment.

I am willing to put money, a majority viewing those testimonies, will struggle not to hang Brand immediately from the nearest lamp post.

It is very difficult not to let emotions to take over ones anger and self control

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Keepyer Internetpoints

One woman offered her stories about Brand to the press. They weren't interested since her stories were positive and presented him as having a good character.

The 1,000 times you were kind and considerate don't subtract from the time when you were a rapist.

Anyway this is just one of the many things that make me hate youtube. I can't wait until Rumble has as much content since it does not run with this censorship crap, cancelling crap, and guilty until proven innocent crap.

Rumble? Isn't that a right wing platform? I thought you were in the fake left John Pilger, Chris Hedges camp.

Somebody ought to demonitize Youtube.

You can. You can boycott it.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Russell Brand presumption of innocence is defined in law

The Presumption of Innocence: A Deflationary Account

https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/106108/1/The_presumption_of_innocence._A_deflationary_account._Picinali._Final.pdf

However the reality is open to opinion.

I like many others form our own measure of guilt, regardless of any evidence of shame, regret, remorse, culpability.

So is it not human nature to embrace in the most heinous of circumstances the presumption of guilt?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

itsonlyrocknroll

Russell Brand presumption of innocence is defined in law

The Presumption of Innocence: A Deflationary Account

I don't know why you keep bringing up presumption of innocence when Brand hasn't been charged with any crimes.

As far as the documentaries go, we can make up our own minds based on what is presented in the documentary.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

His ex-wife Katy Perry sells her music catalog for £180m and claims to have insider info.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

2020hindsights

Your comment raises the very question that is being discussed in parliament.

Whether the guidance relating to reporting restricts should not also be extended to matters ranging from accusations, allegations made in the media, be reported to the relevant authorities before publication.

In other word should the power to bring blanket reporting restriction, in this case compel the C4, Sunday Times, Times to seek formal Judicial guidance, if such evidence could harm future criminal prosecution cases. Or the presumption of innocence jurisprudence.

This point was raised at committee hearing.   

Extending/updating the current guidance, below            

There are occasions, however when it is necessary to make an exception to these principles, to protect the rights of children or the identities of some adult complainants for example. Such issues often arise at short notice and the law relating to the decisions that have to be made can be complex.

https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/reporting-restrictions-in-the-criminal-courts-fifth-edition-update/

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

itsonlyrocknroll

There are occasions, however when it is necessary to make an exception to these principles, to protect the rights of children or the identities of some adult complainants for example. Such issues often arise at short notice and the law relating to the decisions that have to be made can be complex.

Sure. But it is still talking about if he goes to trial, he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. He isn't going to trial at the moment, but if he does, I totally agree.

Outside of a tril, I reserve right to form my own opinions and comment as such.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

2020hindsights

I hope I have not given you the impression that am arguing or attempting to smother your opinion which is perfectly valid. And heartfelt.

I am surprised this whole news story has taken so long to air.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The BBC said on Tuesday it had removed some shows featuring Brand from its iPlayer and Sounds platforms after deciding that some past television and radio content 

Whatever happened to proven innocent until guilty? Character assassination is now a big threat to anyone that gets accused for "stepping out of line."

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Whether he is guilty of the allegations or not, one must admit that Brand has got the "crazy eyes".

0 ( +4 / -4 )

I have receny loved his interviews and stuff on Rumble

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Russel recently spoke about the Hawaii fires.

Soon after these "allegations" followed.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

He also exposed Bill Gate's plans.

I guess powerful people don't like it when someone points out the elephant in the room.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

being a well-known sceptic and critic of the government and the controlling elite, he promoted his views on his social media channels. He is also extremely perceptive, eloquent and intelligent, even if his delivery can be abrasive and polarising.

it’s so very convenient that as soon as he starts to criticise powerful people allegations of rape suspiciously turn up.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Wesley

He also exposed Bill Gate's plans

Which plans were those? The nanobots in the vaccines?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

He has not been convicted of anything, these are only claims.

The reason the establishment wants to shut him down are his inconvenient, independent opinions.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Kaowaiinekochanknaw

I have receny loved his interviews and stuff on Rumble

The "Culture, Media and Sport Committee" of the UK parliament is pressuring Rumble to censor him there too. Clearly, he is an unwelcome voice, and the elites want to give him the Alex Jones treatment.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The reason the establishment wants to shut him down are his inconvenient, independent opinions.

Or maybe he is just getting canceled for being a rapist. How have you determined it's actually a conspiracy to keep him down and not accountability for his actions? Granted, he hasn't been tried, so his canceling could turn out to be unfounded, but neither of those equates to some grandiose conspiracy by The Man to keep The Brand down, as you have concluded. So how have you come to your conclusion? Did you read something in your alternate media, that isn't available to the consumers of the MSM?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Cancel culture gone wild.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Cancel culture gone wild.

So do you feel that rapists should top being persecuted by society? Or if not, how do you think this should have been dealt with?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

So do you feel that rapists should top being persecuted by society? Or if not, how do you think this should have been dealt with?

Oh--you're bringing up an entirely new issue. Because Brand is not a rapist. No court has convicted him. It also appears he hasn't even been charged with a crime.

So to stay on the issue in the article, do you think society should call someone a rapist when that person has not been charged with the crime, never mind not even having been convicted?

Is it legal where you live for the media to say or print in public that someone is a rapist, even where the person has not been convicted of the crime?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Oh--you're bringing up an entirely new issue. Because Brand is not a rapist. No court has convicted him. It also appears he hasn't even been charged with a crime.

And he hasn't been canceled as part of a criminal proceeding. The court of public opinion is not the same as a legal court, and does not have the same required standard of guilt. He will never go to jail based on public opinion, he needs to be found guilty in a legal trial for that.

But the people have determined he is likely a rapist, this is how public conscience works - it expresses outrage that actions considered to be anti-societal, and rape is such an offense.

So based on that, do you feel society should just let rapists slide? That is the only way I see that we could get rid of cancel culture of suspected rapists, by deciding as a society that rape is acceptable. So back to my question:

So do you feel that rapists should top being persecuted by society? Or if not, how do you think this should have been dealt with?

Note I didn't make questions about prosecution, only persecution.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

And that is cancel culture. We're on the same page.

Yes. Cancel culture is the voice of society, that keeps people from going too far left or too far right. When people go too far one way or the other, society reacts and cancels them.

It's unfortunate that some innocent people get caught up in it. Fortunately, they are not prosecuted for being canceled. And fortunately, those who actually did the thing they are canceled for, face accountability for their actions.

Based on someone who has not been held to the court required standard of guilt, as you mentioned?

I'm not asking a legal position, I'm asking a social question. I'm asking if you think society should drop the idea that rapists should be persecuted. Brand has not been found guilty in a court of law. He is legally innocent. He has however been found guilty in the court of public opinion. That's how public opinion works - people look at a situation and make a judgment on it individually, and that collectively becomes public opinion. This is a natural means by which society ensures that people not only find the idea of rape abhorrent, but also fear the idea of being caught for doing it.

The only way we will ever stop the accidental persecution of wrongly persecuted rapists is to normalize rape, removing society's natural and unstoppable forming of an opinion on one even accused of rape before they are convicted. I know in an idealist's mind, it shouldn't be that way, and everyone should keep their opinion open until he is tried, but this is the real world, not an ideal utopia, and public opinion is quick.

So what is your real world solution?

According to you, he is not a rapist.

Wait, what? I haven't made any statement as to my conclusions on Brand either way until this point. But since I stand accused...

I actually try to live by the standard of your ideal; giving someone the benefit of the doubt until they have been tried. That said I'm also human, and part of the public, and in my nuanced opinion, it doesn't sound good for him. But I'm not privy to any of the facts, and haven't heard them laid out at a trial, and I am open to the idea that he could be entirely innocent of any wrongdoing, and even potentially the target of a conspiracy by The Man to keep down The Brand; if someone were to show any kind of evidence however, not just because no one has has proven that didn't happen.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

We want a society that doesn't falsely accuse people of crimes don't we?

Are we talking legal or social? Socially, I want rapists persecuted. I also want false accusers persecuted. Harshly on both of them, to keep people understanding that neither of these behaviors is acceptable. And I empathize with victims of rapists, and victims of false accusers. Both of these are horrible crimes.

Legally, I want those who are found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt to be prosecuted.

There is my nuanced response for you.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

We don't want a Lynch-mob crowd deciding the fate of people do we?

Wait, are you discussing ideals, or reality. There will never be a perfect Utopia during our lifetimes. The idea that every person on the internet is somehow able to never form public opinion until a legal verdict has been handed down, is fantasy. We live in a day and age where information travels world wide in minutes. So what's your real world solution to the matter, based on the real world we live in?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

And he hasn't been canceled as part of a criminal proceeding. The court of public opinion is not the same as a legal court,

That's the point.

Great to see we are on the same page.

So what's your real world solution to the matter, based on the real world we live in?

As my comments show, the real world solution is that we let the criminal system take care of determining whether or not someone is a criminal--or rapist.

Which hasn't been the case with Brand, so we don't call him a rapist.

And we don't cancel him.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

gcFd1

Which hasn't been the case with Brand, so we don't call him a rapist.

So you are trying to censor people from calling him a rapist? I thought you were pro-free speech.

And we don't cancel him.

Why not? If he violates the terms and conditions of YouTube.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

So you are trying to censor people from calling him a rapist? I thought you were pro-free speech.

Are you trying to censor me from saying what happened to Brand is a result of cancel culture?

Are you supporting cancel culture? Do you believe it is legal for media to refer to someone as a rapist if that person has not been criminally convicted of rape?

Why not? If he violates the terms and conditions of YouTube.

How'd he violate?

You aren't pro-free speech?

0 ( +4 / -4 )

As my comments show, the real world solution is that we let the criminal system take care of determining whether or not someone is a criminal--or rapist.

No, that's not a real-world solution. You will never get everyone to wait until a court case has happened before they make a judgment as to whether they think that person did it. You won't even ever get a majority. What you are discussing is ideology, not reality.

And we don't cancel him

Clearly, the court of public opinion does. Again, the court of public opinion is the moral voice of society, and society really doesn't like rape, or false accusations of it.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

No, that's not a real-world solution. You will never get everyone to wait until a court case has happened before they make a judgment as to whether they think that person did it. You won't even ever get a majority. What you are discussing is ideology, not reality.

That's the real world for the most part in most of the Western world.

Nobody is thrown is in jail or prison for rape without being convicted by a court.

Clearly, the court of public opinion does.

Great! We are still on the same page!

Again, the court of public opinion is the moral voice of society, and society really doesn't like rape, or false accusations of it.

Excellent. Because with Brand, there has been no rape. Just accusations.

You don't want media and the public calling someone a rapist, even when there are only rumors, right?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

That's the real world for the most part in most of the Western world.

Where is this supposed Utopia you claim, free of cancel culture? Most of the western world? I think not. Cancel culture is very real in the western world.

Nobody is thrown is in jail or prison for rape without being convicted by a court.

And no one is thrown in jail with cancel culture. They are related, but independent.

Excellent. Because with Brand, there has been no rape. Just accusations.

Yes, and guilty or not, he has been found as being attached to acts considered to be morally deficient, and therefore canceled.

You don't want media and the public calling someone a rapist, even when there are only rumors, right?

Again, you're back to arguing an unrealistic ideal that will never happen. Do I want that to happen? No, is it going to? Yes. Is that worse than the alternative, which would be a society where rape is accepted? Not a chance.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

gcFd1

So you are trying to censor people from calling him a rapist? I thought you were pro-free speech.

Are you trying to censor me from saying what happened to Brand is a result of cancel culture?

No. When did I say that?

Are you supporting cancel culture?

Yes.

Do you believe it is legal for media to refer to someone as a rapist if that person has not been criminally convicted of rape?

Did you watch the documentary? They didn't call him a rapist. And that's obviously on legal grounds. They want to avoid a defamation lawsuit, which is easier to win in the UK. (And in Australia, it's ridiculously easy.)

It doesn't stop me from calling him a rapist.

Why not? If he violates the terms and conditions of YouTube.

How'd he violate?

Did you read the article? "If a creator's off-platform behavior harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action to protect the community," a YouTube spokesperson said.

You aren't pro-free speech?

Generally, yes, but social media companies need to implement content moderation.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

No. When did I say that?

It was a question.

And ok, so you support cancel culture. I don't. But interesting you are not pro-free speech, yet you support this type of speech.

Did you watch the documentary?

No.

They didn't call him a rapist.

Didn't say they did.

It doesn't stop me from calling him a rapist.

That's the problem with cancel culture.

And in certain countries calling him a rapist in public would be against the law. And should be against the rules on this site.

Did you read the article? "If a creator's off-platform behavior harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action to protect the community," a YouTube spokesperson said.

I read it. You didn't understand my question? How did he violate the rules?

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites