The media corporations now publicly reviling the influential social critic are cashing in on him again, writes Jonathan Cook. This time by bringing down the very celeb they built up.
Russell Brand at London Revolution Protest in June 2014. (David B Young, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
By Jonathan Cook
Jonathan-Cook.net
There are times when we would all be best advised to keep quiet and wait. But given that almost no one seems willing to hold their tongue on the latest claims being made about Russell Brand, I feel compelled — wisely or unwisely – to make a few tentative observations: not on the allegations, but on all the noise.
Let me preface these comments with an additional observation: It should be quite possible to hold more than one thought in one’s head at the same time. In fact, it is normally a pre-requisite for having anything interesting to say.
1. Allegations of sexual assault and rape are very serious indeed. They need to be investigated by police and, if found credible, tested in a court of law, where the alleged victims and the suspect are given the chance to make their case. Trial by TV is no substitute for such an investigation and trial. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
2. Brand has admitted to his past as a sex and drug addict. The Dispatches programme appears to have intentionally conflated long-standing, and well-known, “bad boy” behaviour with far more serious, potentially criminal allegations. That conflation does not strengthen the case against Brand. It muddies the waters. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
3. The media companies now fuelling the public mood via trial by TV are the very same companies that delighted in Brand’s sex-addict persona. As the Dispatches’ archival footage and testimonies make clear, those media corporations willingly exploited his persona – even allegedly at the risk of putting members of their staff and audiences in danger – to increase corporate profits. No one should regard them as good-faith actors in this latest development. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
Donate to CN’s Fall Fund Drive
4. In recent years, Brand has often argued that he went on a long and difficult personal journey of redemption, and that he is ashamed of the way he behaved in the past. There is at least ostensible evidence to back up Brand’s claims. There is zero evidence that the Dispatches documentary represents any kind of act of contrition by the media corporations now publicly reviling Brand for his behaviour. They haven’t seen the error of their ways. They are simply cashing in on Brand again – this time by bringing down the very celeb they built up. It’s all money in the bank for them. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
5. It is deeply unhelpful to focus on why these women delayed for so long in coming forward with their testimonies. It takes a lot of courage to take on a celeb when he or she is the toast of the world’s most powerful media corporations, and especially when the celeb in question is being celebrated by these powerful corporations precisely for flaunting their sexually predatory behaviour.
It does not follow, however, that the timing of these allegations is purely coincidental or of no interest. Most likely, these women are being listened to now, both because Brand is no longer the toast of Tinseltown, and, perhaps even more signifiicantly, because he has become an outspoken critic of the very corporations that once feted him. He speaks to many, many millions of young people with the authority of a celeb-turned-whistleblower. He is possibly the most influential critic of capitalism in the English language (depending on how one defines influential).
The fact that people over the age of 35 mostly don’t feel this way about him – or capitalism – is irrelevant. Or at least it is irrelevant to someone like Rupert Murdoch, who once made lots of money off Brand, and is now using his papers to pretend that the Murdoch empire cares about Brand’s alleged victims, rather than seeing them as a chance both to make more money from the Brand brand (this time without his consent) and damage an increasingly irritating high-profile critic of capitalism and corporate power. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
6. There has been a long-running, and annoying, tendency on the left to treat Brand as “rightwing” because he refuses to stick to the Democratic Party line. I have written about this preposterous “left” yardstick before. Brand is on the left because he consistently and publicly supports the key issues that concern the left, as I explained here. The fact that he demurs from some of the left’s most unthinking, knee-jerk positions, and is prepared to consider some on the right as potential allies or listen to their arguments, doesn’t make him rightwing, except to the most unthinking, knee-jerk devotees of the left.
But these allegations are being cited by sections of the tribal left as definitive evidence that Brand is rightwing — apparently because they have decided, absent a trial, that he is guilty of sexual assault. This is childish. People on the left can, quite separately from their politics, be sexual predators. Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.
Jonathan Cook is an award-winning British journalist. He was based in Nazareth, Israel, for 20 years. He returned to the U.K. in 2021.He is the author of three books on the Israel-Palestine conflict: Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish State (2006), Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (2008) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (2008).
If you appreciate his articles, please consider subscribing to his my Substack page or offering your financial support.
This article is from the author’s blog Jonathan Cook.net
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Donate to CN’s
Fall Fund Drive
It’s easy to point fingers as long as they are not pointing at you. Shouldn’t all this media hype be better directed at people like Biden, Hillary, Obama, and others in sex operations like Epstein’s? Why isn’t there more concern over Epstein’s flight list compared to Brand’s bullshit? I think we all know the answer to that question. And why, in this crazy upside down world, don’t we care more about the trafficking of children to many of those on Epstein’s flight list. MSM is not following the real story to support those who don’t want you to follow it. Instead, this is what they give you. Disgusting. The entire world seems disgusting for many and various reasons.
“Innocent until proven guilty”.
There you go….
I usually don’t jump in on these things because they just seem so silly but I can’t resist here. No, Jonathan Cook, the left does not think Russell Brand is right wing because he “refuses to stick to the Democratic Party line.” The DP is not a left wing organization. Get a grip. And most of all Russell Brand is NOT “possibly the most influential critic of capitalism in the English language.” That is certifiable.
Personally I don’t think he’s very smart or funny. He seems like a garden variety narcissist with a toolbox full of “look at me” gimmicks. First I ever heard of him was when people were passing around his rant about how people shouldn’t vote. Boy, there’s an original idea. Some of my friends actually thought it was revolutionary, and I think Brand did too. Then there was was his global 12 Step tour a few years back. I think he figured that if all the people of the wold — all 8 billion of them — would start going to AA meetings our problems would all be solved. Typical born again nonsense. Hardly dangerous.
Should he be shut down? I don’t think so. Did he do what he’s being accused of? Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. Like so much goes that on these days he will be seen as guilty by innuendo until further notice. That’s not right.
“Awh, Mon, The Fruit is Rotten!” Every generation blames the one before!!! The core of the rot lies in Political Power and Influence, i.e., The “BRAND.” One cannot get intimate w/officials & maintain independence. Be ‘em good or bad, they will use, abuse & abandon you! “Dude, don’t go fishing off the company pier.”
[Russell Brand] “a worried man with a worried mind. No one in front of [him] and nothing behind. There’s a woman on [his] lap and she’s drinking champagne. Got white skin. Got assassin’s eyes. [He’s] looking up into the sapphire tinted skies. [He’s] well dressed, waiting on the last train…Standing on the gallows with [his] head, in a noose. Any minute now, [we] expect all hell to break loose….” Bob Dylan, “Things Have Changed.”
REVOLUTION!?! Anyone? Everyone?
Imo, no doubt, Russell Brand got a grip on life by reaching a higher level of consciousness, “a heightened state of awareness & understanding. It’s often associated with spiritual growth and enlightenment; BUT, it can also simply refer to a more expanded, open way of thinking and being.”
Does ‘letting go’ mean losing everything “we” have, or does it mean gaining everything “we” never had?!?” Don’t Panic. It’s Organic, “Consciousness!” Bringing [CONSCIOUSNESS] to it.” Reason is Wealth!
“There’s a lot of water under the bridge. And, a lotta other stuff too,” for example, “JRB WARE,” Hunter Biden’s “Brand,” Joey R. Biden aka Robert L. Peters aka Robin Ware. The BIDENS’ family’s, Numero Uno (1); AND, “only” a$$et,” Joey R. Biden; AND, obviously, the rabid, right-wing, rat ba$tard, “tribal left,” got their “long-range missiles w/cluster munition warheads,” aimed @ Russell Brand’s heart & Bank Account!!! It’s f.u.b.a.r. It’s Bidenomics, gone viral, on high speed, manufacturing hate, war, & fascism; masquerading it as “democracy.” It’s moronic. It’s the “Omicron aka The Rona,” sounding off the universal refrain, “El Capitalismo es el Viruz!” $ANCTIONS aka $ocial Murder. WHO’S next?!?
“Consciousness & Dysfunction CANNOT Coexist!!!”
“people start “bringing consciousness to it.” [“The only thing that ever leads to positive changes in human behavior is an expansion of [CONSCIOUSNESS].” “Real REVOLUTION Means Expanding Consciousness, Both Inwardly & Outwardly.”
“Much like a physical law, this is a constant principle of human life in this world.” Caitlin Johnstone @ hxxps://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/07/26/consciousness-and-dysfunction-cannot-coexist/
In sum, Russell Brand was key to Rupert Murdoch’s fortune as Joey R. Biden was key to Hunter’s “the $portsman’s Brand” Bidens’ fortune! Best practice, “Send in the U.S. Marshals and Book ‘Em! The whole fam damily!!! Ciao
……p.s. “Things Have Changed,” Bob Dylan hxxps//youtube.com/watch?v=L9EKqQWPjyo&pp=ygUkYm9iIGR5bGFuIHRoaW5ncyBoYXZlIGNoYW5nZWQgbHlyaWNz
Thanks Jonathan. Your points. #1, there’s no reason to justify or apologise for the legal system. I’ve had my fill of Trial by Unproven Assertion. Evidence or shut up. # 2, The media does not, and never will, replace the courts. Journalists are trusted less than real estate agents. #3, See #2. Repeat. #4, there’s no reason to write that you are not condoning rape. Nobody does and your fear is unfounded. #5, delay dilutes evidence and credibility. The possibility of justice diminishes. Trial by Unproven Assertion becomes the elite tool. #6, the “left” left the building some time ago. It chose enslavement. There’s no reason to write that you are not condoning rape. Nobody does and your fear is unfounded. Best wishes. Mik
I wish you were correct in your assessment that “nobody condones rape.” I hate to tell you this, but there are millions of men who condone rape. They love nothing better than to watch rape porn (which is often actual rape), they sit as judges and don’t think rape is much of a crime if a crime at all, they think there’s nothing wrong with forcing traumatized women in a rape crisis center or shelter to share space with males, and then there’s the rapists. I think they condone rape.
It doesn’t matter what one thinks of Brand, and what he talks about. Like him, dislike him – agree with him, disagree with him. Government and media see him as a nuisance and a threat.
Focus, not on him since he hasn’t been convicted of any crime, but on what the media (& also the UK government) are trying to do to him AND the Rumble platform that he uses. There are some fundamentally important principles here the author is reminding us not to forget.
Justice and censorship for a start. He’s being treated as if proven guilty of the crimes of which he has been accused, and censored for his views and opinions that mostly go against the ‘official’ narratives on a range of topics.
Is this treatment fair? What happened to freedom of speech in the UK?
You absolutely lost me with this hyperbole. ¨He is possibly the most influential critic of capitalism in the English language (depending on how one defines influential).¨ He is not all that ¨influencial, ¨ and I take my critiques of capitalism from knowledgeable people who are not millionaires grifting on Youtube.
I like your “logic”. “Russell Brand does not influence me, therefore he is not influential.” Try stepping outside of yourself sometime.
If the media companies targeting Brand cared about victims of sexual assault, they would have already gone after Biden. But that’s not what they care about. They care about subservience to empire. Those who gain a large following speaking out against it will find themselves in the crosshairs of the propaganda arm of the state. There is no mystery.
I monitor a few corporate news outlets and several independent outlets. The independent outlets all see the corporate outlets as such brazenly lying, propaganda outlets that it’s almost hard to believe adults could be so absurdly and publicly dishonest. They are passing the stage of being astonished at the brazen, extensive lying, and entering a phase of openly mocking and laughing at them.
Brazen liars hate being unmasked, and they especially hate being unmasked and laughed at. Once a whole population is laughing at you, it’s extremely hard to regain your dignity and authority. Russell Brand delivers the facts with humor, that devastating combination which the “powers that be”, the “oligarchy of unbridled greed” (quoting Jimmy Carter), the “Deep State”, the “financial oligarchy” cannot risk tolerating.
If they can’t catch him in a Jeffrey Epstein honeytrap, they’ll make up something similar, like they did with Julian Assange. They are masters of deceit, the main purveyors of disinformation on the planet. Their current “anti-misinformation” campaign is an obvious cover for their massive censorship campaign.
(IMO) Not much New here… More in tune w/ J. Assange redux……….
What gives the game away is that it’s not just the social media, middle class, virtue signalling illiterate it’s also the establishment, the government, the security services, the MSM. This is an orchestrated attack against an annoying truth disseminator.
The punishment is the process.
I have a similar experience, not with respect to the allegations but from criticizing the democrat party from the left. There’s nothing a democrat voter hates more than being legitimately criticized by the true left and consequently being outed as being a right winger. Especially when you connect the dots to their responsibility for mass murder and terrorism. They simply can’t deal with it and their denial of reality is so powerful that no matter what I say from the true left, they knee-jerk assume I must be a Trump supporter. And once they get that in their mind, there’s no fixing it because they can no longer hear anything you say. Their eyes glass over as they wrap themselves up in their blanket of superiority and self-righteousness.
I’ve experienced the same. The moment one points out the truth of the DNC, one becomes a commi, Trump and Putin lover
Ditto. Even my spouse accused me of enabling Trump when I criticized HRC in 2016 and Biden in 2020. Stated they were both undesirable candidates. Held my nose and voted for them anyway since I’m in a swing state.
Yeah, I hear you on the spouse situation. My wife is a hard-core ‘Maddow-ite’ and I’ve been moving further left (or more accurately, the Dems have moved significantly to the right) since the early 1990’s (ie; when Clinton began his ‘triangulation’ crap), so we’ve had to agree not to discuss politics to maintain our marital bliss….
I can’t imagine living with someone so delusional and not being able to discuss politics! Marital bliss?!
It’s crazy. They tell us we’re the rightwingers, when it is they who are. They call Brand a rightwinger, when he clearly is not. The projection and hypocrisy is all too much.
I’m working on an essay about WHY “liberals,” “progressives,” whatever you choose to call them, have left their brains in a toilet somewhere.
Russell Brand: another imbecile telling the public what they already know or want to hear and CASHING IN ON IT.
What is he telling the public they want to know? I do not think the public at large wants to hear what he has to say because he is anti-war in a pro war society. He also strongly calls out Big Pharma and the corrupt corporations, politicians and lying MSM so I am curious as to his CASHING IN ON IT. What is the IT?
Gayle, wow, does Russell call out Big Pharma – bet they’re quaking in their boots! This is my point, the guy does nothing of any importance, and is changing nothing. Opinions aren’t worth spit. You need a pharmaceutical insider to properly inform people – i.e. the public needs to read a book by someone intelligent.
Many years ago, Brand said he was prepared for a “revolution” to change things in Britain, then ended “Trews News” and set up shop appealing to Americans as their was more money in IT. “IT” being worthless, pointless “gossip”.
Are you referring to Russell? If so, you have never listened to him in the last 5 years . I am well over 35 years old, very interested in current affairs and greatly appreciate Russell’s sensible, articulate discussions.
I would argue that the public is notoriously ignorant of the behind-the-scenes machinations of politics and geopolitics. Anyone who believes otherwise could reasonably be mistaken for…an imbecile.
nwwoods, why do you defend this clown and filthy money grubber? The first thing he did after the revelations hit the newspapers was, NOT to defend himself, but beg for money.
Years ago, he shouted “REVOLUTION” in the UK, then bought a £3 million home, married, and had kids. He’s now appealing to Americans to rake in millions of dollars – several orders of magnitude more than a surgeon who actually does real work and saves lives.
UK newspaper headline you can look up for yourself: “Russell Brand willing to die for revolution: ‘There’s no point doing it if you’re not'”
When this alleged anti-establishment figure had the chance to “stick it to the Queen”, he, instead, chose to shake her hand.
The guy is a fraud – or, as he calls himself, “The Pied Piper”, aka “The Trickster”. Talk is cheap; Brand is expensive tat!
“this clown and filthy money grubber? ”
My Mom said take one to know one
scoobo, that’s a variation of “You’re just jealous, aren’t you?”
Admittedly, it’d be nice to be wealthy – without money, you can be badly humiliated and trampled over. However, if I were rich, I would enjoy life, NOT cheat people out of their money.
Actually he did defend himself, and no he didn’t beg for money. Maybe he’s all you say he is, maybe not, but unless you have something solid to prove your assertions, you have only your own opinion.
Mr. Cook raises some important points. I noticed that The Guardian immediately jumped on the bandwagon and has had daily attacks on Brand. I have no idea what the truth is, but the circumstances of this are very suspicious. The Guardian, and other MassMediaCartel outlets, seem to have had articles ready to go, before the accusations were made public. Brand is already guilty of all charges made against him, no mater if they are true or not.
Also in today’s Guardian, a pack of lies about Roger Waters is repeated. A “new documentary” about Waters is full of the usual claims of anti-Semitism. They will not stop trying to smear Roger and shut him up. The only reason they have not yet been successful is because Waters has enough financial resources and public support to fight them.
Indeed…and Julian Assange and Jeremy Corbyn, both of whom suffered concerted attacks by the sh_tlib Guardian and Murdock’s yellow press
Please, do not put Brand in that esteemed company.
“Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.”
*proceeds to condone rape*.
What difference does it make how long ago it was or if Brand “went on a long and difficult personal journey of redemption, and that he is ashamed of the way he behaved in the past”? We’re talking about rape. By a known sex pest, which you dismiss as “bad boy behavior”. And you wonder why women don’t come forward. It’s because they can’t win. No one ever believes the victims. Their names are smeared and their lives are ruined. And here you are worrying about “ruining” the life of a multimillionaire whose popularity is only growing as a result. That’s what rape culture is.
BTW, innocent until proven guilty only applies if we’re talking about sending him to prison (which I hope happens, so I’m all in favor of a criminal trial). But it does not protect one from other consequences of their behavior. Employers routinely fire people who are credibly accused of rape. Advertisers don’t want to be associated with rapists – these are healthy things. If you don’t want the “establishment” to use your rapeyness against you at inconvenient times, I dunno, you could try not being rapey. You’ll note that Jimmy Dore, Joe Rogan, Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson have not been accused of rape, yet they have the same message as Brand. Why do you suppose that is? Maybe because they’re not rapists?
Anyway, Brand really hasn’t done anything to scare the establishment. His banal message is the same as hundreds of other anti-vaxxers/libertarians with large platforms. He’s no Assange who literally exposed U.S. war crimes. If you think protecting a wealthy white man over the word of multiple victims with corroborating evidence is speaking truth to power, you might want to check which side you’re really serving.
You did not understand the point of the article. If you care anything about the truth, and honesty, and decency, “employers” and “advertisers” can do nothing to support your position. Employers and advertisers are always opposed to truth, and any kind of transparency and accountability; unless it is about somebody else and the burden is theirs. That point was made in the article, like the “Pointing this out…” assertion. The two greatest purveyors of untruth and falsehood in the world are capitalism and religion.
Thank you.
So, Dienne, if I accuse you of murder, your employer should have the moral right to fire you, and society should shun you as a unconvicted murderer, right?
Look, he has (or had) a large, diverse audience who related to his anti-establishment stance. He’s known worldwide. That alone makes him influential in the eyes of a corporate media that despises him. You can assume he’s guilty of rape, but until we have something more solid than accusations by anonymous people, it’s only opinion.
Well said Mr. Cook. (Phillip Schofield is long forgotten) And look what they did to Jeremy Corbyn. Trial by TV/MSM is absolutely correct; ask Julian Assange about that.
Have the women involved gone to the police?
Lol, they had to dig these women up.
Who cares about Russell Brand? Besides Russell Brand? Why does he
deserve all this print space? Is he a force for world peace? Has he
turned the public tide for less to no oil? Has he come up with a Ukraine
Russia peace plan? I have dirt under my fingernails. Would that
feature big?
Brand is important because of the PRINCIPLE of free speech. Those who oppose what he says want to silence him. Not with reason or argument but with character assassination that has nothing to do with his political positions, without any due process. If they can silence a Russell Brand they can silence anyone who doesn’t follow the narrative that keeps the ruling elites in power.
” Is he a force for world peace?”
So far as I know, yes, Russell Brand is a force for world peace in myriad ways. For one thing, he speaks out against the criminal capitalist forces running the world. His guests include Vandana Shiva, a champion fighter of big pharma and big ag, who are definitely working hard to control the global food/medicine supply, and Roger Waters, who speaks out against mass US invasion policies as well as US support of Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians.
Julian Assange was also charged with sexual assault to discount his credibility.
I am not saying the women are lying. I’m saying these men are easily vilified because they’re a threat to the powers that be, and that those powers will do whatever it takes to discredit them. They’ll even keep them in a tortuous prison for YEARS with zero charges in order to bring them down. And, as Mr. Cook pointed out, “Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.”
Doris, re Julian, it’s worse than that. Julian was never charged with sexual assault. He was wanted for questioning. That investigation was dropped after years of Sweden not bothering to travel to England to interview Julian (not bothering at the behest of the UK authorities).
Did you actually read the entire article? Brand is an extremely intelligent, articulate and influential political commentator.
Who cares about Russell Brand are all of the powerful people and institutions trying to censor and silence him. So far, none of the anonymous women making these accusations have gone to the police. There are no criminal charges. In fact, this whole thing came up because two UK Murdock-owned media outlets were digging for dirt on Brand. As a result, all of the large social media platforms have either censored or demonetized him or are being pressured to do so. The two owners of Rumble are being threatened by the UK with fines and imprisonment if they don’t censor Brand. Glenn Greenwald did an excellent report on this on Systems Update.
Brand deserves the presumption of innocence until or unless proven otherwise in a court of law. Until then, he does not deserve to have his livelihood and reputation completely ruined.
That, in a nutshell, is why what is being done to Brand is important and should concern all of us. To quote Johnathan Cook: “Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.”
Well i wonder why he seems to be singled out. Other people advocate similar political ideals; Jimmy Dore, Alex Mercouris, Scott Ritter, Judge Napolitano, Douglas MacGregor etc., etc. but they haven’t been attacked. (Yet) And why were they digging for dirt on him? Who did he piss off?
They haven’t been attacked because they don’t have anywhere near 6.6 million followers on YouTube alone.
Mmmm. I suppose that could be quite worrying for TPTB.
First, some of those people you mention have been attacked. Alex Mercouris can’t even use the word “Nazi” in his commentaries an political analysis, otherwise YouTube would ban him. Second, you clearly have never watched Russell Brand’s program otherwise you would understand why he’s the focus of a concerted effort to get him deplatformed and censored. I suggest you watch his most recent Rumble show: a discussion with Glenn Greenwald. Then you might understand what makes him dangerous to the establishment. Which, again: “Pointing this out does not mean one is condoning rape or sexual assault.”
Dore is definitely next on the smear-job list, I would guess
LOL Selina. Really? Who gives a fig for russell bland.
Every American should give a “fig” for what is being done to Russell Brand. You need not like him, but if you value free speech, including one’s right to criticize war and other harmful US and UK policies, it seems the Russell Brand censorship is and should be newsworthy. The fact some journalists were hired by government media to locate these women to use to silence Brand, is, indeed, a real concern.
Point taken C. Parker. But i don’t see any difference with him or others who decry US/UK policies. (But Simone has just informed us of the amount of his followers.)
A lot of women can’t seem to get past the accusations, which I understand. I don’t know if he’s guilty of rape, but I don’t know. He may well be. This is an awful position to be in for anyone because just the claims alone seem to make one guilty in the eyes of some, so it’s “guilty until proven innocent” in the court of public opinion. So how does one go about proving one’s innocence in such a case?
I have dealt with what you’re writing since the slanderous assault on Assange. Many women seem to fall for whatever the MSM spews and accept it without thinking. I have been attacked because I didn’t believe the accusations against Assange, and when I said I don’t accept junk media screaming that someone’s a rapist I got attacked again. (So nice to be able to block screamers.) Brand may very well be guilty in which case evidence needs to be provided in a suitable context such as a court. Period.
Bravo, Mr Cook!
Thankyou for call attention to hypocracy.