Is free speech for everyone, including Russell Brand?

[Appalonia]

Firstly I want to say I 100% believe the victims and think he should be held accountable for what he's done. But the demonetising of his YouTube channel, and being basically scrubbed from all media channels doesn't sit well with me. And, this is creating a massive backlash online from the many pp who already think these allegations have only come out now as ' The Establishment ' doesn't like what he's saying.

So many women have been 'cancelled' for saying things like men aren't women and women need safe spaces ( JKR ) and more recently Roisin Murphy for objecting to puberty blockers. It's tricky, but if we believe in free speech for us, shouldn't it be the same for everyone?

Yep.

If Kevin Spacey had been a brand like Brand, would we all have been calling for his cancelling like we are with RB? I think we would have.

YouTube is a publisher - we don’t all get a column in the times either. Brand can put what he wants on his own website, within the rules of his ISP

It's really chilling to that anyone could be denied the right to earn a living for any reason, other than them being tried in a court of law and sent to prison.

Yes. Free speech is for everyone, even the cnuts.

Just like feminism is about rights for all women, even the ones we can't stand, even the ones who don't want those rights.

So if a man flashes you at work, tries to stop you leaving a room, then goes off an jokes about it with a colleague, which is recorded, he shouldn’t lose his job, unless you go to the police and secure a conviction?

Only criminal behaviour is enough for that?

Really?

He can still say what he wants, can't he? YouTube isn't a human right, but free speech is. They're not the same thing.

I agree. I don't think it's right as a free speech issue to "cancel" people's YouTube channels in this way. It's never just going to affect people you don't like.

I completely believe the women's accounts of their rapes and sexual assaults. I've known men like Brand. He's a misogynistic scumbag. I would fully support his prosecution and as a free speech issue I also support their right to name their abuser.

I think RB is horrendous & should be in jail.

But those govt letters attempting to demonitise his channels should worry us all.

So if a man flashes you at work, tries to stop you leaving a room, then goes off an jokes about it with a colleague, which is recorded, he shouldn’t lose his job, unless you go to the police and secure a conviction?

RB is self employed

I am aware of that.

I was responding to the poster who thought only criminal conviction was enough to deprive of livelihood

And what pisses me off about this is that much of the conversation on Twitter ( and Spaces ) is NOT about his behaviour, and how it was enabled for so long, but about how easy it is to take down men by false allegations. Which a LOT of men believe. I feel like the discussion has been hijacked and a really important point ( men yet again abusing their power and sexually abusing women, and getting away with it ) has been completely lost...

Having a YouTube channel demonetised isn’t the same as being denied a right to earn a living. There are plenty of organisations that are comfortable with employing men who’ve got a bad reputation with women. Whether they should be comfortable with it is a different question.

Can someone explain what YouTube have done?

Have they pulled his videos from the platform or just stopped him making advertising revenue from them?

As I understand it, it’s the ad money Margot. His videos are still on YT.

Brand hasn’t been cancelled because his views are offensive (though they are, in my view). He’s been cancelled - or demonetised - because he’s been accused of a serious crime. That’s a slightly different issue. You might still think that’s wrong but it’s not at all analogous to the cancellation of people like Rosie Kay or Graham Linehan.

I see. Thanks.

So not a free speech issue at all then.

I daresay Russell Brand has many other sources of income than YouTube.

It's not a free speech issue though, it's about the YouTube brand trying to protect itself.

Is YouTube monetisation a human right now?

Not making money from your speech doesn’t impact your right to speak.

Youtube demonitise for all sorts anyway, I believe some YouTubers get individual videos demonitised if they swear for example.

You are confusing the right to free speech - which he has - with a "right" to have a particular channel host it in a particular way

Yes, this is capitalism in action.

It may well open up larger arguments about the public square and how much power social media companies have.

For me it is the transgression of boundaries between one type of thing and another that is the issue. If someone has been accused of a crime, then let the criminal justice service deal with it. Until the point that someone has their personal liberty removed from them in the form of imprisonment then it is not fair game to go after their job and everything else in between.

This is not about supporting Brand, but about prortecting civil liberties and not falling into the trap of a Chinese social credit type of system - whereby people can be completely cancelled for going against the dominant moral/political/social system.

It is very Orwellian.

And people trying to suggest that you don't care about women's rights/trans rights/black lives if you point this point is part of the problem, as I see it.

If you point this out

I doubt YouTube is a very high % of his income FWIW.

No, I don't think he should be cancelled. I'm 50/50 about whether demonetisation is ok or not in this case, in all honesty. I think a company like You Tube should be able to make their own mind up - I don't think a bank should be able to do so as easily as a social media company (ref Nigel Farage).

RB's social media presence isn't (currently) posing the threat to women that Andrew Tate is. I think deplatforming him should be the focus of conversations before we get to RB (I believe the women).

Do you think a police officer accused of rape should stay in post until conviction? I don’t know about your employer but mine would suspend anyone accused of a serious criminal offence without pay with immediate effect. As would the vast majority of employers I expect. Brand’s publishers have suspended him in the same way an employer would. Big deal.