Comment on YouTube suspends Russell Brand from making money off his channel — The suspension comes following the publication of rape and sexual assault allegations against the British star

ryannathans@lemmy.fmhy.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• DrZoidbergYes@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Another way this could be phrased is - Following serious allegations of rape and sexual assaults advertiser’s do not wish to be associated with Russell Brand so YouTube stops showing their adverts on his channel

  source

  • Aghast@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    But why can’t those advertisers just block him as an individual?

    We are now in a world where accusations now result in a de facto guilty verdict. We already saw this with Johnny Depp and Amber Heard.

    source

    • eestileib@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      This is how advertising works. Advertisers do not want to be responsible for vetting every placement, part of what the publisher is being paid for in “run-of-site” / “run-of-network” advertising is curating of ad-adjacent content.

      source
    • ZzyzxRoad@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      a de facto guilty verdict. We already saw this with Johnny Depp and Amber Heard.

      We only saw this with Amber Heard. Speaking of simping, Depp had an army of incels and “men’s rights” douchers behind him from the get go. Anyone who had any objective comments about that whole case would get chewed out and brigaded by a bunch of insecure woman beaters standing up for poor little Johnny Depp. The worst was how everyone acted like they knew both of their lives inside and out, and they really believed that they were experts on their situation because they watched livestreamed court proceedings. It is a great example, just in the opposite direction.

      source

      • SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Just watched a documentary about it which made Depp look pretty bad. I still believe he was more of a victim than her.

        Why in the fuck do you people think you can ignore the recording of her taunting him about how no one would believe him and then what a FUCKING PUSSY she kept calling him? The evidence she’s a huge piece of shit is there. Him too to a degree, but she’s at another level. He lost part of his finger. Can’t fake that shit.

        source
    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      There’s a difference between accusations and a four year media investigation. Especially UK media that has to adhere to pretty strict libel laws. They’ve had to make sure they have the receipts and proof for the papers legal team to sign off on the story. This isn’t like Zoe Quinn chucking out some accusations on Twitter and ending up with a bloke topping himself. Also if you remember, Depp lost his lible case in the UK.

      source
    • Lazylazycat@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      There’s nothing stopping him getting his own advertising on his channel, he hasn’t been banned from YouTube.

      source

      • Aghast@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Why does Google have to restrict which form of advertising he needs to use?

        By confining him to certain types of advertising, it makes him less appealing to advertisers.

        What if these accusations end up being false? I’m not losing sleep over Russell Brand losing money but if we hold the same logic it could damage smaller entities that can’t afford it.

        We see this with channels like the Armchair historian. Google demonitized that channel just because they had Nazi flags in a historical context when talking about WWII.

        Another case could be made for anyone who wants to defame another individual. If someone doesn’t like management for a local restaurant that advertises on YouTube, someone can just say “I heard from several people you had rats in your restaurant” or “I heard you had racist employees in your restaurant”. We now live in a world where just the allegation is enough to damage an entity, regardless of if it is based in fact.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• FaeDrifter@midwest.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Russell Brand is a wealthy, famous Hollywood star who does not know who you are and will never give you the love you needed from your father.

  source

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    You have allowed yourself to become so cynical that the only reason you can conceive of for speaking up in another person’s defense is that it might be part of some psychological complex from childhood.

    source

    • FaeDrifter@midwest.social ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Give me another reason to stand up for a famous hollywood star you know nothing real about, just a carefully and expensively crafted media persona.

      I’m all for a good discussion around the social implications of false accusations, but there’s an exceptional amounting of simping going on for one specific special boy.

      source

      • admin@lemmy.my-box.dev ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Aside from false accusations - how about tech monopolies (only beholden to profits/shareholders) being judge, jury and executioner?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        He helped save Sarah Marshall, that has to count for something

        source
• Honytawk@lemmy.zip ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The thing is, he isn’t cancelled.

  Nobody who can say they are cancelled actually are cancelled, because if they were actually cancelled you wouldn’t hear anything from then.

  Anyway, he still is allowed to post Youtube videos, just doesn’t get money from Google for them.

  source

  • CaptnNMorgan@reddthat.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    “nobody who can say they were cancelled actually are cancelled” don’t you think that means you should redefine what “cancelled” means in your head?

    source
• NuPNuA@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It’s a bit more than an accusation, it’s a four year investigation by several media outlets signed off by their legal department. Not someone on twitter.

  source