A Brief Comment on Russell Brand
The Story That Truly Matters
Presuming you’re not the sub-dweller of a rock, by now you’ve heard about the allegations of sexual misconduct that were brought against Russell Brand.
He was actually the one to break the news, getting ahead of the coming tide by announcing that he received two letters, one from a “mainstream media TV company” and another from “a newspaper,” both making a litany of claims, most notably that four anonymous women had come forward.
You’ll hear it everywhere: "Why are the alleged victims coming forward now, after all these years?"
But this is actually not at all what happened, and the truth here is, I believe, absolutely paramount.
Turns out what actually happened is that some folks in the media had an idea and went looking for victims. They started with their conclusion and sought out anything that could even remotely support it.
They apparently had a stunning degree of accurate information on his past partners and through their “investigation” discounted any cases where ex-partners gave a positive response or contradicted said conclusion, thus proving the nature of their agenda.
They then put together a hit piece, with absolutely no substance.
A hit piece that happened to align with a documentary…that had already been filmed and produced.
And just like that...he's cancelled.
Vulture even published an article, eagerly listing everyone who’s dropped him.
This includes his Agent, his book publisher, having his content removed from the BBC, demonetized by YouTube, having his special cancelled on Paramount+, and most comically, being dropped by the women’s charity that Brand supported, Trevi.
All of this over the span of days, and all over allegations that powerful people went looking for from four anonymous women.
Now, clearly I’m not saying there isn’t merit to the claims — how could I know? I don’t and neither do you. But no one in good faith and a clear mind can say this isn’t blatantly nefarious. Had the women come forward and the medias covered that, you’d be reading a completely different article, but that’s not what happened.
It’s easy to presume that the motivation of this clearly coordinated attack on Brand is due to his recent content, calling out the mainstream medias, world governments, Ukraine, Covid, and all the other untouchables of the past few years, and the truth could just as likely be as simple as some medias exploiting his popularity for attention and outlets overreacting in fear of the kangaroo court, like they did with Pewdiepie some years back.
To wit, the why simply doesn’t matter.
And frankly, neither do the veracity of the claims. At least, not yet.
Yeah, I said what I said.
What matters is that this is a weaponized media machine on full display, and that needs to be understood and stopped.
To be fair, I think this will ultimately bolster his message: censorship always works...until it doesn't. But that's only because, like Dave Chappelle, he's too big to fail, and that doesn't mean this tactic isn't dangerous for the rest of us.
The fact is, he could absolutely be guilty — and if that's true, I want to see him held to account — but there are two different discussions here, and the most pertinent, the one with the most sweeping societal ramifications, is multiple powerful entities attacking an individual for profit at-best and political influence and control at-worst.
“Okay,” I hear those of you in the back saying, “but these companies have the right to drop people.”
Sure, but if you think any of them dropping him are acting in good faith, ask why Cardi B (who openly admitted to drugging and robbing men as a stripper) or R. Kelly (who was convicted in a real court for real sex trafficking and serving real time) are still on YouTube.
Now, I’m not gonna waste my time checking if their content is on the BBC, especially since my link to Cardi B up there is to a BBC article telling her side of the story, but if I had to guess, I’m sure we’d find a plethora of contradictions there as well as with the other companies mentioned.
There’s naive, and then there’s pretending something’s not going on here.
And the response simply isn’t organic, these companies are being actively pushed for his cancellation.
A push coming, not only from those who launched this campaign, but at the very least the UK government itself.
Incidentally, that letter is a bad look as the UK moves forward on a new internet censorshi—er, Online Safety Bill; a bill that happened to be written by the same woman who sent said letter…
And indeed, the UK government’s targeted more than just Rumble.
As an aside, to their credit, Rumble seems to be the only company acting like they’re not entirely insane, a trend I hope they never cease.
I imagine more will be revealed in time, and I may come back to it depending on how the story progresses, but for now, I’ll leave you with this:
Regardless of one’s thoughts of Brand and his content, this is a dangerous situation with global ramifications, and as far as I’m concerned, until there's any substantial evidence or a criminal case brought to the table, that should be the only aspect of this matter that we’re talking about.
That’s the story that truly matters.
Thanks for reading.