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?

I saw RB on Twitter complaining that the government were campaigning for him to be deplatformed and I assumed it was BS, but this thread makes me wonder, has the government actually got involved? I'm clearly behind on the news.

No one has curtailed his right to free speech, all his videos are still available.

He has, and continues to wield, lashings of ‘free speech’.

By which I mean he has a platform and many many followers, and, monetised or not, he’s using it to spout his crap about the establishment setting him up. Etc. And gullible numbskulls and/or cynics with their own agenda are cheering him on.

Save your tears over the jackboot of repression for the women every day who are too scared to come forward and report the abuse they have suffered. Because ‘the establishment’ re-traumatises, disbelieves, alienates them.

The argument that private companies are fine to censor people because they are private is ridiculous. There isn't a government run website where people can express dissent. The fact that the government intervened and wrote to rumble to cancel Russell brand shows that they are stifling free speech by proxy and people are apparently fine with it .

I can't stand him tbh and he gave me serial killer vibes since I watched his rhlstp appearance with Richard herring. I'm so sick of everything that doesn't align with the mainstream narrative being called right wing, alt right or whatever. Why actually is right wing a pejorative term now anyway? It was a perfectly legitimate stance until propoganda took over.

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.

But RB has not been arrested or charged with a crime. If my employer suspended me for allegations made by an anonymous source then I'd be really pissed off. How long should someone be suspended for when no official action has been taken?

YouTube doesn't have to host RB (though interestingly they still are, so if he's not getting the cash who is?) but the letter from the parliamentary committee urging platforms to demonetise his content should concern us all.

YouTube are a private company. They have not censored him, they have stopped him making money from his videos on YouTube. They made this decision before the UK parliament wrote to Rumble (who by the way refused to do anything). Presumably YouTube took the decision because even though Brand has not yet been tried in a court of law, he HAS ADMITTED exposing himself to a woman without consent and laughing about it on air.

The government intervention is absolutely outrageous.

But as for private companies, what is the alternative suggestion? Would people support them being forced to agree to 'monetise' someone they don't want to? Who would enforce that? What would the mechanism be? And how would that remain impartial?

The fact is YouTube is a private company. If it was public the First Amendment could apply but it's not. They will probably be protecting their profits as advertisers can pull out of advertising on the platform. During the Dispatches documentary there were very few adverts.

Quite a few advertisers have pulled out of Rumble over the last few days. So let's see what happens with Brand and Rumble.

All of those people who say conspiracies could never happen because someone will always leak the truth...hmm. How exactly do they think that anybody could leak the truth and gain traction? Drives me insane.

The BBC is an interesting one, given its status as a (at least ostensibly) public broadcaster. As is Channel 4.

amp.theguardian.com/culture/2023/sep/21/video-platform-rumble-rejects-mps-call-to-demonetise-russell-brand

If YouTube really gave a shit they would pull his videos.
As it stands he doesn't make money from the videos but YouTube does.

YouTube is still profiting from his videos. They haven't removed them. They have just stopped sharing the advert revenue with him but they're quite happily pocketing it for themselves. So when they say they've done it because of moral reasons they are full of horse shit.

This is in fact the case. Rumble wrote an excellent rebuttal. This is a dangerous precedent to set, a huge overstep by the government especially considering no criminal charges have been made yet, let alone a guilty verdict in a court of law.

I'm absolutely appalled by the allegations and I've always disliked the slimy cretin. But cancel culture is really getting out of hand in this country and everyone deserves a right to a fair trial. How can any judicial process be fair if your free speech and income is stripped from you before you've even been charged. He is being punished before the police have even knocked on his door. It's all backwards.

People are literally fine with proven government censorship by proxy. Apparently anything goes when you are a limited company. I'm pretty sure it's not a good thing. YouTube have already had many purges of unsanitary views. Look at kiwifarms and Joshua moon, all guns blazing because they document the insanity of many degenerates on the Internet, not even political.

Apparently people want a bland sanitary Internet where allies cheer with pompoms everything the government do. Drag is apparently the most empowering thing that exists and should be foisted on toddlers at every opportunity.

I used to love reading about conspiracy theories, not that fun tbh when you are living it.

If I represent a studio or tv channel, hiring Brand or Spacey becomes a liability. Hiring a. Controversial actor means people may not pay for the product produced. When there are plenty of actors to choose from, I am likely to simply choose someone else.

it’s not clear to me how Brand is a liability to YouTube. YouTube doesn’t hire the content creators. The public can speak simply by declining to view his content.

How many people discount any information not provided by the BBC anyway? People with not a thought in their heads that doesn't immediately effect them. I hear so many "god you have been watching loons on YouTube" despite it being a resource where lots of intelligent people discuss ideas.

I despair, once you stop actually watching the banal shit the mainstream puts out, you realise how shallow it is. It didn't used to be this way.

I'm absolutely appalled by the allegations and I've always disliked the slimy cretin. But cancel culture is really getting out of hand in this country and everyone deserves a right to a fair trial.

Totally agree. When Farage had his bank account closed my first thought was 'unlucky, arsehole!' but that was an emotional reaction to the man himself, rationally I know it's a slippery slope once you start arbitrarily handing out 'punishments' to those with opposing views.

My emotional side would LOVE to see Andrew Tate removed completely from social media, stripped of his assets and thrown into jail...I was delighted when Greta pulled his pants down on twitter, however, I know if I'm happy to see that happen to Tate without due course then I have to be equally sound with it happening to others, some who I may agree with (JKR, etc) It's not ok for governments to interfere, especially when they have a ridiculous amount of their own members under investigation for sexual misconduct. They should take a step back into their own house and get it in order.

Besides all that, it plays right into the conspiracy theorists hands!

I'm not going to look at his channel to find out but I do know that YouTube has demonetised other creators videos and still made money from them.
Whether this is just because its a single video I don't know.

Just because some people watch bollocks on YouTube doesn't mean it's not a credible source. I have watched many debates and discussions that the mainstream no longer feature, because they are busy catering to the lowest common denominator.

When was the last time you saw in depth explanations or discussions of quantum physics on the BBC?

I do think brand is a wrong un, but this was in the back pocket to bring out when he got a bit too big for his boots.

YouTube is a private business, they can choose who their want to feature/monetise, based on all manner of factors

I have significant concerns about the power social media companies have. People can talk about them being private companies but I don’t think that applies to these behemoths. They have the power to be judge, jury and executioner (metaphorically of course in the latter) which can’t be ok even if we think the person is guilty because it’s only a matter of time before they do it to someone who we support.

Equally there are proposed laws in Australia that seek to force these companies to only publish “the truth”. But whose truth? That set out by the government? Such a dangerous precedent.

Why? You are supporting fascism. Why do you think only "approved" voices should be able to profit from supportive viewers? Explain yourself.

His videos are still there, he just isn't making advertising revenue from them at the moment. Boo fucking hoo. Maybe he should get a proper job that isn't dependent on advertising revenue and actually involves, yunno, working instead of just having verbal diarrhoea in front of a camera and waiting for the ££ to roll in.

I don't think this is a free speech issue tbh.