I've no idea what The Young Turks is and I've no idea what your post is driving at as it seems to me it's all over the place. Your first paragraph makes absolutely no sense. You're implying that they're only doing it because he holds certain views, yet they've allowed him to air those views with impunity for years, but bizarrely by the end of your post you're saying that they've done it because of the allegations. Make your mind up mate.Of course they're entitled to have what they want on their platform, it just seems you only get de-platformed or your ability to monetise your content is blocked if your theories are targeted towards a certain directions.
In this instance, he's had his youtube channel for a long time, but suddenly they won't let him make money from it, 2 days after these allegations come out, and yes at this point its still allegations. So its clearly not down to some breach of their rules is it? Let's be honest about that. I'm sure they'll say it is, but you're not that naive are you?
I mean channels like The Young Turks and others make all sorts of theories about what people would consider the right, no different to what Alex Jones, Brand etc do, but for some reason they don't run into any Terms Of Service problems when their target is in the opposite direction. Funny that isn't it?
Whether Brand is guilty or not, that's yet to be determined, he may well be. But if we're looking at this objectively, he's simply had his revenue stream cut off on the basis of allegations that come out a couple of days ago. I just don't think it sets a good precedent generally. Courts exist for reason.
Just have to look at what is happened with the Danny Masterson rape conviction and ensuing scandal involving Ashton Kutcher. Specifically how Mila Kunas has been groomed and brainwashed since she was 14 to support, by all accounts, some pretty horrible men (with so many “it has been the best kept secret in Hollywood that they were abusers and perhaps even worse” comments coming out now). And she is still doing it, even after the backlash to them sending a letter of support to the judge asking for a lenient sentence.Russell brand is a twat. My wife convinced me he was good, along with a few other talentless tossers who have made the big time recently.
But what gets me is the way the industry did nothing.
I understand lesser known names couldn't bring it to the forefront, but he mixed with some people, some stars who were bigger than him, who's name carried a lot more weight, yet they said nothing, and even partied with him and joined in with his shiteness.
Those people should be ashamed.
Far better doing it this way than continuing to pay him.I thought the same, but it's a suspension whilst they investigate his potential crimes.
If he is guilty though, and youtube have allowed him to monetise his YT account whilst being a rapist for example that would be more wrong.
Were we wrong to suspend Benjamin Mendy?Agree they are entitled to do what they want, however the reason given
YouTube has said it has "suspended monetisation" on Russell Brand's channel for "violating" its "creator responsibility policy".
assumes guilt, which is wrong.
Bit of a first for me…sharing a GB News clip.
He could always set up a Go Fund Me page. No doubt millions of his followers will be more than happy to donate given that they're so far down the rabbit hole that they believe every word of shite that comes out of his mouthThey demonetised him. He can still spout whatever nonsense he wants on the platform, he just can’t make money off it.
But I suppose to grifters that is the same as being deplatformed.
Russell brand is a twat. My wife convinced me he was good, along with a few other talentless tossers who have made the big time recently.
But what gets me is the way the industry did nothing.
I understand lesser known names couldn't bring it to the forefront, but he mixed with some people, some stars who were bigger than him, who's name carried a lot more weight, yet they said nothing, and even partied with him and joined in with his shiteness.
Those people should be ashamed.
Not sure the serial killer analogy holds up in this instance, unless their friends and family were aware of them going out with many people and those people then regularly disappearing.Yeah but if he has raped a woman, it doesn't necessarily mean his mates knew about it does it?
Everyone and their dog knew he was notorious for shagging women, and clearly it was mostly with consent but there's nothing illegal about that, whether it's 1 person or 2000 people he sleeps with.
Even in the documentary, there was only one claim of actual rape, so if he has done it, it's highly likely he hasn't told his friends.
So all his mates probably knew is he was just their mate that was clearly notorious for banging as many women as he could and they probably assumed it was all with consent. So what exactly can they report or be ashamed about?
Even most serial killers were someone's friend and family that just hasn't been found out.
Hindsight is 20/20.
I do think, given all the whispers about him that they would have dropped him like a stone, not gone out partying with him.Yeah but if he has raped a woman, it doesn't necessarily mean his mates knew about it does it?
Everyone and their dog knew he was notorious for shagging women, and clearly it was mostly with consent but there's nothing illegal about that, whether it's 1 person or 2000 people he sleeps with.
Even in the documentary, there was only one claim of actual rape, so if he has done it, it's highly likely he hasn't told his friends.
So all his mates probably knew is he was just their mate that was clearly notorious for banging as many women as he could and they probably assumed it was all with consent. So what exactly can they report or be ashamed about?
Even most serial killers were someone's friend and family that just hasn't been found out.
Hindsight is 20/20.
It's all about politics for some. Everything. When it isn't.He's been accused of rape. And you're talking politics?
Katherine Ryan outed his as a rapist quite some time ago.Yeah but if he has raped a woman, it doesn't necessarily mean his mates knew about it does it?
Everyone and their dog knew he was notorious for shagging women, and clearly it was mostly with consent but there's nothing illegal about that, whether it's 1 person or 2000 people he sleeps with.
Even in the documentary, there was only one claim of actual rape, so if he has done it, it's highly likely he hasn't told his friends.
So all his mates probably knew is he was just their mate that was clearly notorious for banging as many women as he could and they probably assumed it was all with consent. So what exactly can they report or be ashamed about?
Even most serial killers were someone's friend and family that just hasn't been found out.
Hindsight is 20/20.
So he's guilty then?Glad they've done it.
And I admire those brave women who have come forward, it's a huge thing for a woman to come up against a world famous star.
Remembering the Harvey Weinstein thing, it was brave women who outed him.
The Andrew Sachs affair would surely be enough on its own, your argument doesn't hold water for me sorryMaybe they weren't previously aware of them until now? I highly doubt that they'd have spooled through hundreds of hours of his material across multiple TV channels before giving him a platform
Really? have you read some of the posts on here never mind elsewhereHow is it not still a thing?
So what are you saying then? That it's a complete coincidence that they've decided to cut his revenue stream a couple of days after the allegations surfaced and that they haven't done it because of the allegations? I'm struggling to see what the alternative reason is.The Andrew Sachs affair would surely be enough on its own, your argument doesn't hold water for me sorry
Seriously, WTF?Yeah but if he has raped a woman, it doesn't necessarily mean his mates knew about it does it?
Everyone and their dog knew he was notorious for shagging women, and clearly it was mostly with consent but there's nothing illegal about that, whether it's 1 person or 2000 people he sleeps with.
Even in the documentary, there was only one claim of actual rape, so if he has done it, it's highly likely he hasn't told his friends.
So all his mates probably knew is he was just their mate that was clearly notorious for banging as many women as he could and they probably assumed it was all with consent. So what exactly can they report or be ashamed about?
Even most serial killers were someone's friend and family that just hasn't been found out.
Hindsight is 20/20.
With hindsight, apparently....Were we wrong to suspend Benjamin Mendy?