Dispatches/Sunday Times investigation: Russell Brand accused of rape and sexual assault

[SebastianBlue]

What this highlights to me is just how quickly someones life can be turned upside down or completely destroyed by the media, i'm not for one minute saying he is innocent in all of this but it isn't as if he has been charged or found guilty of anything yet.

What if this all turned out to be people trying to destroy his reputation and nothing more, quite worrying how this can happen.

Why are so many men worried about this, as if a four year investigation involving many, many legal checks and hundreds of people resulting in numerous credible accusations against them could happen to them at any time?

The slippery slope argument is quite disingenuous, especially when the legal system (and largely culture itself) is literally structured to protect the accused and punish the accusers in these types of cases.

@gordondaviesmoustache I put this to you, as well, in addition to my other inquiry.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

We need to look at the seemingly effortless way that conditions can be in place where famous people or people heading or at the top of companies and establishments can procure satisfaction by victimising other people.

We've also got to try to understand why so many people are employed in these organisations who genuinely look the other way until the shit hits the fan and they suddenly do an Esther.

I think its human nature tbh. We all get so wrapped up in success at all costs that things can slide. I dont think that will ever go away, as a species we have put money, success achievement on a pedestal, as long as we are working towards that goal then anything goes I find.. Until something goes wrong or someone calls it out.

But what we're seeing now will be played out again in another generation because we always turn a blind eye when money is involved. In my experience anyway.

 

[paulchapo]

So you feel there is nothing problematic about commenting on the allegations or the nature of the response to the allegations without knowing anything about them (or their veracity)?

I know what has been alleged in a TV documentary the same as everyone else. Have I pored over it, sought out every article out there? No. Would me doing so make one iota of difference to Brands guilt or innocence? No. Would anybody else's opinion who had done so have the same result? No.

We can all have an opinion but that's all it is, an opinion.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

He was attacked for having the opinion that he should be punished by a court, nothing wrong with that opinion is there?

That’s for the police and CPS to ascertain.

It’s just a bit weird to ignore what has been said about him and suggest others do until he’s been through a court case.

Did he do the same with Prince Andrew?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Even in the face of media historically being the main driver of most sexual misconduct and abuse being investigated at all. That is, absent media exposure of allegations, and the subsequent pressure placed on authorities by more aware citizens, an even smaller proportion of sex crimes would be investigated, much less lead to legal proceedings (keep in mind in 2022 ~98% of sexual crimes reported to police did not lead to charges, and those were merely the ones reported)?

That’s a separate argument. If matters progress to criminal proceedings then that will change things, but we aren’t there yet. At the moment all we have is a TV show and a newspaper article.

Do you think that alone should be enough to deprive someone of their livelihood? And if so, why?

 

[SebastianBlue]

I know what has been alleged in a TV documentary the same as everyone else. Have I pored over it, sought out every article out there? No. Would me doing so make one iota of difference to Brands guilt or innocence? No. Would anybody else's opinion who had done so have the same result? No.

We can all have an opinion but that's all it is, an opinion.

So, in your opinion, Saville was just not a very nice person?

 

[journolud]

Reprehensible behaviour yes. Rape no.

Where do you draw the line on non consensual sexual behaviour/ contact?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That’s a separate argument. If matters progress to criminal proceedings then that will change things, but we aren’t there yet. At the moment all we have is a TV show and a newspaper article.

Do you think that alone should be enough to deprive someone of their livelihood? And if so, why?

Surely that is up to the platforms that air his videos.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

If it was a local newspaper or regional newspaper making similar allegations against a local business man or self-employed professional, their client base would disappear overnight unless they were locked into cast iron contracts.

That makes me equally uncomfortable. Who polices the media?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That makes me equally uncomfortable. Who polices the media?

OFCOM

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Surely that is up to the platforms that air his videos.

Who have been pressured to do so by a government minister. Do you think that is appropriate?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

OFCOM

Nice one.

 

[SebastianBlue]

That’s a separate argument. If matters progress to criminal proceedings then that will change things, but we aren’t there yet. At the moment all we have is a TV show and a newspaper article.

Do you think that alone should be enough to deprive someone of their livelihood? And if so, why?

I don’t think it is a separate argument. You were seemingly arguing that the media, as opposed to the formal legal system (which has historically failed victims of sex crimes at practically every turn), is dangerous and so should not be a factor in these affairs. That means the nature and contribution of the media in the investigation and prosecution of sex crimes is very much a pertinent topic.

And has his entire livelihood been deprived?

Should companies and other entities now ignore contract clauses for the requirement of good behaviour and not bringing their organisation in to disrepute? That would be an odd stance from someone that holds legal standard as the basis for consequence. Are they not within their right to invoke those clauses (which generally do not require charges or convictions to do so).

Is it not the case, especially in recent times, that most of those of the far-right, conspiracy-peddling, grifting variety have ultimately benefited from such controversy because of the nature of their following?

Has there been concrete evidence presented that his income has been substantially impacted?

Wouldn’t that have to be a determination we base on outcome of civil proceedings? ;-)

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Who have been pressured to do so by a government minister. Do you think that is appropriate?

In a similar way that the FA writes to players asking to remember their responsibilities?

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

I think there’s a wider and worthwhile debate around the impact that has had on Brand, especially in terms of his right to earn a living, without any legal proceedings yet being commenced.

I’m not suggesting it’s a straightforward issue, but I am uneasy that his income has been cut off in the way it has, and ministers are publicly commenting on this, based, as we currently are, simply on a TV programme and a newspaper story. That doesn’t sit right with me.

Whilst I don’t seek to undermine this documentary or necessarily challenge its veracity (or merit) that’s all we have at the moment. We are heading down a very dangerous path where that alone is sufficient to impact on someone’s life in this way, in the absence of anything else (as is currently the case).

Whilst I dislike Brand for lots of reasons, this isn’t just about him, and I am uncomfortable more generally about the power of the media to influence public opinion in a way that appears to be wholly unchecked, and extremely dangerous for us all.

He chose a career that relies almost explicitly on reputation. Many people in the public eye lose their earning potential through no fault of their own, and some live on the edge, like this guy. If it all proves false then he will have plenty of followers to relieve of their hard-earned cash to make up any shortfall. Just like Mendy, if he’d treated people properly and with respect he wouldn’t be where he is now.

 

[SebastianBlue]

That makes me equally uncomfortable. Who polices the media?

Who polices the police?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Who have been pressured to do so by a government minister. Do you think that is appropriate?

Where is the evidence that YouTube and Paramount were pressured to do so by a government minister?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I don’t think it is a separate argument. You were seemingly arguing that the media, as opposed to the formal legal system (which has historically failed victims of sex crimes at practically every turn), is dangerous and so should not be a factor in these affairs. That means the nature and contribution of the media in the investigation and prosecution of sex crimes is very much a pertinent topic.

And has his entire livelihood been deprived?

Is it not the case, especially in recent times, that most of those of the far-right, conspiracy-peddling, grifting variety have ultimately benefited from such controversy because of the nature of their following?

Has there been concrete evidence presented that his income has been substantially impacted?

Wouldn’t that have to be a determination we base on outcome of civil proceedings? ;-)

I’m not saying the media should not be a factor in these things, and to expect that to be the case is wholly unrealistic, I just don’t like the fait accompli that we are being presented with and its profound consequences - without any extraneous due process being engaged. You appear to be more comfortable with the unchecked power the media have.

 

[SebastianBlue]

He chose a career that relies almost explicitly on reputation. Many people in the public eye lose their earning potential through no fault of their own, and some live on the edge, like this guy. If it all proves false then he will have plenty of followers to relieve of their hard-earned cash to make up any shortfall. Just like Mendy, if he’d treated people properly and with respect he wouldn’t be where he is now.

@gordondaviesmoustache Brand also has based most of the last few years of his work on levelling largely unsubstantiated accusations and hundreds at people and organisations.

Is the argument that he should be able to do that but substantiated accusations against him should be ignored and, once more, they should have no impact on him, despite his accusations having impacts on others?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

He chose a career that relies almost explicitly on reputation. Many people in the public eye lose their earning potential through no fault of their own, and some live on the edge, like this guy. If it all proves false then he will have plenty of followers to relieve of their hard-earned cash to make up any shortfall. Just like Mendy, if he’d treated people properly and with respect he wouldn’t be where he is now.

I think that is all fair comment, but my observation isn’t solely, or even principally aimed at Brand, it is about the unchecked power of the media, which is both real and troubling.