the current government seems to be occasionally intruding into running the country, which I guess comes as a shock nowadays.
Russell Brand: rape and sexual abuse allegations, grifting and general dodginess - discussion
- Thread starter mod
- Start date
gosub
~#
With reference to covid...I seem to recall a then prominent member of this government running the length of the country once he had covid
gosub
~#
Good for Rumble. In the 'unlikely' event an MP faces sexual allegations in the future somehow I don't think they are going to be suspended without pay whilst the matter is resolvedThe BBC is reporting on it too.
Rumble rejects MP's 'disturbing' letter over Russell Brand income
The video site rejects a "disturbing" letter from a UK Parliamentary committee about his fees.www.bbc.co.uk
cupid_stunt
Chief seagull hater & farmerbarleymow's nemesis.
You made me search it out, I am now going to sue you.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
Not all that much, no. The main question is whether this is something The State is doing to try and eliminate a problem and which could become a regularised threat to media independence, or whether it's a non-systemic overreach, in this case by her and/or the committee.
I think it's probably the latter, mainly because the State
a) has better, more subtle levers if if wishes to pull that sort of crap rather than getting ministers to do an incompetent letter-writing campaign. Providing written evidence on headed and signed paper to people who will definitely go off about it ffs, that'd be amateur hour for us let alone "Them". It's Matt "here's my WhatsApps" Hancock levels of thick if you're actually trying to quietly suppress anything.
b) Brand is about as threatening to the priorities of the State as Mr Blobby.
Like I think it's worth telling the culprit/s off about, because it's very bad practice, but it's also important to put the brakes on before the point of indulging the wibblier end of things.
Last edited:
ouirdeaux
Caring, Understanding, Non-judgemental Type
Serge Forward
Just enjoyin' my coffee.
Blame, blame, blame... bloody sheeple
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Yeah they're great, going on about a 'cancel culture mob' ffs. What's next, cheering GBNews if they give Brand a platform as well?
The letter asked if he was able to make money off content related to the accusations, which might end up being charges. It's hardly a massive State overreach, I think being concerned he might start churning out content full of horrible shit and conspiracy bollocks about the case through which he makes hundreds of thousands of pounds is a fair question and something he shouldn't be able to do.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Fair enough. I stand corrected.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
I don't think anyone should make money from social media, I don't really give a flying fuck if they demonetized everyone tbh, we'd all be better off.
I can't summon up one gramme of concern for a sexual predator and likely rapist having this done to them, especially given the fact we're just talking about one letter asking about it, and it's not even a likely possibility.
I can't summon up one gramme of concern for a sexual predator and likely rapist having this done to them, especially given the fact we're just talking about one letter asking about it, and it's not even a likely possibility.
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
Monetised social media is pretty much the worst possible amount of budget to throw at things. Enough to fill every available corner of the internet with entertainment, infotainment, commentainment and plausible-sounding grifts, not enough to fund serious investigative work. And with an algorithm that has no ethical direction to promote the latter over the former in any case. Disastrous.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Oh Sweet Jesus that was awful, add me to the class action suit.
Lurdan
old wave
Very interesting post. Misogyny (or whatever) is misogyny whether it's then or now, even if it's expressed in different ways. But it's not just the packaging which changed between the 1970s and the 'oughts', it was also the 'reach', and the level of reward.
I saw a post (I think) which used the word mainstream about Bernard Manning. He was never mainstream. He was a successful club comedian. He was never a headliner on TV. He was one of many comedians on The Comedians and the compere introducing the acts on Wheelshutters etc. Those programmes were regional shows made by one of the ITV companies when it was still split up into different regional areas. There were a few national 'network' slots in the ITV schedule but those shows weren't in them. I remember they were shown here in London but I don't recall them being scheduled as the evenings highlight. And then his TV career ended. He never had a fraction of Morcambe & Wise levels of popularity and he never earned Morcambe & Wise money.
But then I very much doubt that Morcambe & Wise earned Jonathan Ross or Graham Norton money. The levels of potential reward at the upper levels had became significantly greater by the 'oughts'. So had the levels of 'reach', as illustrated by the extent to which the 'zoo' format of competitive edgy boundary pushing became normalised.
"Confronting the audience with their own perceptions and to make them question their prejudices" would be claimed as a purpose by comedians as different as Jerry Sadowitz, Frankie Boyle and Stewart Lee. Doubt there would be agreement about how far they were successful. Johnny Speight set out to do that when he created Alf Garnett and that was Warren Mitchell's purpose in playing the character. Three decades later the character had become part of the alibi some of Gen X told themselves about how much worse the 1970s were, as they laughed at Little Britain. Or at Jonathan Ross telling Gwyneth Paltrow he'd like to fuck her. It's not misogyny. She's a 'celebrity'. She's fair game. She's asking for it. And so on, and so on.
ska invita
back on the other side
Pretty thin distinction - she is a Tory MP - a member of the governing party - and parliamentary committees are essentially part of the mechanism of government
Well that's something else completely, if being able to claim a percentage of revenue from video content didn't exist then its a different conversation, but it does exist, and its not currently up to anyone in government to decide who can and can't be allowed to take part in that, just because they feel like putting pressure on.
And this is nothing to do with having sympathy for Russell Brand.. its a question of what is legitimate interaction between state, business and the public.
Most importantly for me its about the frightening rocket-fueled rise in conspiracism, and where that leads politically. The left are regularly ceding ground to the right over this - saying oh it doesnt matter, fuck Russel Brand anyway, plays in exactly to their narrative and gives power to those right-wing figures who can point to an injustice and use it to build their case. Not that unlike twenty years ago it was the left that was against globalisation, and now this is territory for some mutated 'anti-globalist' right
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
It's also important when talking about the "challenging comedy" crowd to bear in mind comics can be and are very mixed on what they're challenging, when, and why. The same person can be absolutely nailing it on one topic and a nasty bully, a bigot etc on another. Dave Chapelle is probably the most prominent recent example, but comedians have the same chaotic mix of views as the rest of the general public. Brand himself, I have no doubt, retains at least the vestiges of a genuine interest in equity for the working class (everyone needs to look themselves in the mirror of a morning), and will quite likely have really believed his own hype in his protest and left politics period, while at the same time still being a horrible misogynist.
Last edited:
Rob Ray
Weight is meaningless
It does matter, and that's why it's important to get the analysis correct. Unfortunately this frequently means we don't get to be "yes this is a State setup" when personally, as an anarchist, I'd fucking love to - but the logic simply don't stack right. I'd love to slam the government for conspiring to lock us down during Covid, but I can't because it makes no goddamn sense. The advantage the far right has in a post-truth world is they can rattle off any old bollocks just as they have always done, in an atmosphere that favours it.
Last edited:
Yossarian
⏭️
I feel like I just did the Shit Bucket Challenge
ska invita
back on the other side
i agree - i dont think its a state set up to silence Brand because he's too close to the truth!!!1!! - but it is true to say that this is a Bad Thing to for a state body to be doing.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
I'd argue that anyone going on about this is actually strengthening the hand of the conspiracy mob and Brand, even if you think you're doing it for 'anarchist' reasons. Areas like this are not the places with which you can take on the conspiracy idiots, to try and do so is wrong footed imo, it doesn't challenge them, and much like the Assange defender lot, it's making a political error.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
What Rob Ray said, you have to be precise and strong in your criticism, and that has to on some level come from a much more powerful movement than other criticisms do, or you risk it just strengthening you opponents.
We've just had someone on here cheering on Rumble ffs for their position against the cancel culture mob.
I think that's a good topic (although not for here) as I think the poor analysis of much of that movement that fetishised organisations such as the WTO and also had a fixation on finance capital actually laid some of the groundwork for the conspiracy movement we have today - and explains why some of that crowd so easily slipped into it.
We've just had someone on here cheering on Rumble ffs for their position against the cancel culture mob.
I think that's a good topic (although not for here) as I think the poor analysis of much of that movement that fetishised organisations such as the WTO and also had a fixation on finance capital actually laid some of the groundwork for the conspiracy movement we have today - and explains why some of that crowd so easily slipped into it.
Last edited:
1%er
Well-Known Member
Is it usual for the press in the UK to make serious legal allegation about rape and sexual assault from anonymous sauces?
I understand that people who have made reports to the police regarding sexual assault and rape are able to have anonymity in the press (but they have made a police report), I'm really just interested if the press are free to make such allegations from anonymous sauces and claim public interest in the UK. I don't think the press here in Brazil can do that, also in the USA the stories about Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey (found not guilty) and others had named accusers making the allegation in the stories exposing then.
I understand that people who have made reports to the police regarding sexual assault and rape are able to have anonymity in the press (but they have made a police report), I'm really just interested if the press are free to make such allegations from anonymous sauces and claim public interest in the UK. I don't think the press here in Brazil can do that, also in the USA the stories about Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey (found not guilty) and others had named accusers making the allegation in the stories exposing then.
I think I agree with you, it shouldn't be the government deciding this matter, but I do think demonetisation is the way forward with a case like Brand and should not be confused with censorship or silencing. It's taking away a privilege not a right.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Feel free to call a demo against the government and supporting Brand's freedom to make videos and make money off all this then, that's the result of the position you're defending.
Similar threads
