I don't particularly like Russell Brand, as I don't get a sense he really believes everything he's saying, but your complete dismissal that there might be a deliberate agenda here seems really weird. That part seems entirely plausible to me.
Did you not read the Twitter Files and Facebook Files reporting? There's pretty overwhelming evidence that there's a large network of media orgs and political NGOs that spend A LOT of time trying to get certain opinions banned from the internet. The 2 biggest issues on which they've done that has been Covid and the Ukraine war. Brand has pissed them off on BOTH of those issues.
Also your framing of it being Russell himself who threatens them is silly. It's the opinion that threatens them, not the person. They desperately don't want certain opinions to become popular. Support for further funding for Ukraine has declined massively in the US over the last year. That absolutely worries them. It's the exact same pattern you saw with something like the war in Vietnam, and it's the exact same reason they desperately tried to ban disagreement on that back in the 60s. (You could make your same dismissive argument in that case too: "You really think the federal government is threatened by some college kids?")
If it was quite so simple all social media companies would have distanced themselves from Brand. Only YouTube did so far. Twitter’s owner came out in support. Big time. And is filling the airwaves with Brand defenders like Tucker Carlson.
Google/YouTube have been far better than the likes of Meta, TikTok et al in removing hate speech. Is it for commercial reasons? I don’t know and I don’t care. I like it.
Banning Brand is fair. Should have been done long ago. He has been peddling misogyny and harmful conspiracies for a loooon time (including US being behind 9/11, etc).
As one of the tinfoil hat wearers you so easily mock in your piece, I think you completely underestimate the media. Where was the outrage when Russell Brand was working for the very same media outlets that are now accusing him? Why didn't they care when he was behaving horribly towards women while employed by them? Anyone who paid the slightest bit of attention knew he was a misogynist and mistreated women, but instead of being outraged they laughed about it and gave him awards. It seems like their concern for his victims is a little bit fake and a lot too late.
In my opinion anyone who was allowed to get away with the disgusting comments broadcast by Brand and Jonathan Ross, some years ago, should not have been given any airtime on UTube or anywhere else. At least the BBC took action at the time.
Other media channels have lower standards...or no standards....
Yes, audiences can be gullible and easily impressed and it is deeply depressing that we've reached a point where mock expertise can be idolised.
We have self-declared experts who actually just sell opinions, with no expertise, that people fall for and worship - mindlessly.
I don't think we can pull back now as money controls all media. And people seem to like, and need, 'gurus'.
Great analysis Stephen. Your Tweets have given me hope, I've been pretty shocked at the vilification of Brand's victims on Twitter. We seem to have gone back to the dark ages. I thought there might be a few misogynists out in support of his actions, but it seems more like 80/20 pro-Brand, or maybe that's just the tweets I see.
You could equally conspiracy theorise that Brand has deliberately built an army of online crackpots to cushion himself from the opprobrium he knew was coming from decades of sex assaults.
I don't particularly like Russell Brand, as I don't get a sense he really believes everything he's saying, but your complete dismissal that there might be a deliberate agenda here seems really weird. That part seems entirely plausible to me.
Did you not read the Twitter Files and Facebook Files reporting? There's pretty overwhelming evidence that there's a large network of media orgs and political NGOs that spend A LOT of time trying to get certain opinions banned from the internet. The 2 biggest issues on which they've done that has been Covid and the Ukraine war. Brand has pissed them off on BOTH of those issues.
Also your framing of it being Russell himself who threatens them is silly. It's the opinion that threatens them, not the person. They desperately don't want certain opinions to become popular. Support for further funding for Ukraine has declined massively in the US over the last year. That absolutely worries them. It's the exact same pattern you saw with something like the war in Vietnam, and it's the exact same reason they desperately tried to ban disagreement on that back in the 60s. (You could make your same dismissive argument in that case too: "You really think the federal government is threatened by some college kids?")
If it was quite so simple all social media companies would have distanced themselves from Brand. Only YouTube did so far. Twitter’s owner came out in support. Big time. And is filling the airwaves with Brand defenders like Tucker Carlson.
Google/YouTube have been far better than the likes of Meta, TikTok et al in removing hate speech. Is it for commercial reasons? I don’t know and I don’t care. I like it.
Banning Brand is fair. Should have been done long ago. He has been peddling misogyny and harmful conspiracies for a loooon time (including US being behind 9/11, etc).
As one of the tinfoil hat wearers you so easily mock in your piece, I think you completely underestimate the media. Where was the outrage when Russell Brand was working for the very same media outlets that are now accusing him? Why didn't they care when he was behaving horribly towards women while employed by them? Anyone who paid the slightest bit of attention knew he was a misogynist and mistreated women, but instead of being outraged they laughed about it and gave him awards. It seems like their concern for his victims is a little bit fake and a lot too late.
#istandwithrussell
I refuse to believe that a narcissistic sex addict could have done these things.
In my opinion anyone who was allowed to get away with the disgusting comments broadcast by Brand and Jonathan Ross, some years ago, should not have been given any airtime on UTube or anywhere else. At least the BBC took action at the time.
Other media channels have lower standards...or no standards....
Yes, audiences can be gullible and easily impressed and it is deeply depressing that we've reached a point where mock expertise can be idolised.
We have self-declared experts who actually just sell opinions, with no expertise, that people fall for and worship - mindlessly.
I don't think we can pull back now as money controls all media. And people seem to like, and need, 'gurus'.
But I hope I'm wrong!
Great analysis Stephen. Your Tweets have given me hope, I've been pretty shocked at the vilification of Brand's victims on Twitter. We seem to have gone back to the dark ages. I thought there might be a few misogynists out in support of his actions, but it seems more like 80/20 pro-Brand, or maybe that's just the tweets I see.
You could equally conspiracy theorise that Brand has deliberately built an army of online crackpots to cushion himself from the opprobrium he knew was coming from decades of sex assaults.