Russell Brand is being accused of rape

[effortlesslumen]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Question: Should YT allow any convicted rapist to publish videos? Is being a rapist enough to get you banned from all social media platforms?

Thats a question that can not be awnsered easily, as you can not shove every criminal into a hole and bury them indefinitely nor can you make the rules so loose you invite more crime.  

[Consept]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Question: Should YT allow any convicted rapist to publish videos? Is being a rapist enough to get you banned from all social media platforms?

Imo i think if youve committed a crime, done your time, genuinely have remorse and are not producing videos that encourage anything along the likes of rape then i dont see a problem. In criminal and youth services there are tons of people that have committed crimes and work in that field to help others who might be on that same path, so i would say its almost essential for people to be able to seek redemption. 

However, youtube is funded by advertising this means brands can withdraw their adverts for whatever reason they see fit and this is completely acceptable as you may not want your brand associated with certain people. This is essentially whats happened with Brand, youtube hasnt banned him theyve just demonitised him, but if they hadnt the brands wouldve withdrawn anyway because thats what they did on Rumble. On top of that youtube can completely ban anyone they see fit as a private company but i think this should be reserved for only the most extreme cases, not just because you dont like someones views. For example i think Brands views and presentation are terrible but i dont think he should be banned on that basis. 

Short answer is yes mostly anyone should be allowed to publish but whether thats monetised is down to advertisers discretion.

 

[Danioover9000]

@effortlesslumen

52 minutes ago, effortlesslumen said:

Thats a question that can not be awnsered easily, as you can not shove every criminal into a hole and bury them indefinitely nor can you make the rules so loose you invite more crime.  

   Why are you assuming that Leo's question is difficult? IMO it's a bit easier to answer, for example a convicted rapist, or a rapist under investigation, makes a YouTube Channel about rape topics, the good and the bad of rape, YT has the right to demonetize that channel and even take down the Channel. Why does YT have that right? The same right that @Leo Gura and mods here have the right to check your posts, and issue warnings points or a ban if you're breaking the forum guidelines.

[Tanz]

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

You do know that there's a difference between footage of dead bodies versus hosting a person that may have raped multiple women 10-15 years ago? 

Such things can give people ideas because it allows people that want to kill themselves am excuse to do so. Japan has insanely high suicide rates. Also a white guy going to an Asian country to point a cultural problem as sensitive as suicide is as wrong as the colonizers that came to other countries trying to change another culture without trying to understand them. 

Japanese are extremely proud people and rather kill themselves than not to try their absolute best. Toyotas can drive 1 million miles for a reason. 

Him going to a mass suicide grave yard is shitting on their culture. There's been more violence and death from people not wanting to understand another's culture.

Logans so shallow he would never understand the harm he caused even though he's sorry for what he did 

Edited September 25, 2023 by Tanz

[Danioover9000]

@Consept

38 minutes ago, Consept said:

Imo i think if youve committed a crime, done your time, genuinely have remorse and are not producing videos that encourage anything along the likes of rape then i dont see a problem. In criminal and youth services there are tons of people that have committed crimes and work in that field to help others who might be on that same path, so i would say its almost essential for people to be able to seek redemption. 

However, youtube is funded by advertising this means brands can withdraw their adverts for whatever reason they see fit and this is completely acceptable as you may not want your brand associated with certain people. This is essentially whats happened with Brand, youtube hasnt banned him theyve just demonitised him, but if they hadnt the brands wouldve withdrawn anyway because thats what they did on Rumble. On top of that youtube can completely ban anyone they see fit as a private company but i think this should be reserved for only the most extreme cases, not just because you dont like someones views. For example i think Brands views and presentation are terrible but i dont think he should be banned on that basis. 

Short answer is yes mostly anyone should be allowed to publish but whether thats monetised is down to advertisers discretion.

 

   I partly agree, a better take than some users here.

[Danioover9000]

@Tanz

19 minutes ago, Tanz said:

Such things can give people ideas because it allows people that want to kill themselves am excuse to do so. Japan has insanely high suicide rates. Also a white guy going to an Asian country to point a cultural problem as sensitive as suicide is as wrong as the colonizers that came to other countries trying to change another culture without trying to understand them. 

Japanese are extremely proud people and rather kill themselves than not to try their absolute best. Toyotas can drive 1 million miles for a reason. 

Him going to a mass suicide grave yard is shitting on their culture. There's been more violence and death from people not wanting to understand another's culture.

Logans so shallow he would never understand the harm he caused even though he's sorry for what he did 

   Are you assuming a mental state for the majority of Logan Paul's fans and viewers? Do you have data to show how high the suicidal rates are in Japan?

   So Logan Paul, a white guy, goes to an Asian country to do a social media influencer video, to point a cultural problem as sensitive as suicide, is as wrong as colonizers that came to countries to change their culture, how are the two wrongs here equivalent? Are you being a bit racist and ethnocentric here?

   Speaking of racism, you just have assumed that Japanese are 'extremely proud' people that rather kill themselves than not try their best? So you've characterized Japanese people suiciding themselves as some noble thing rather than them 'doing their best', and ignore the imperialist Japan during WW2, when allied to Germany, expand onto other countries? What about the samurai time period? What about other parts of Japanese history, and their well known hard working attitude, of being very detailed orientated? Heard of Mitsubishi, Subaru, Toyota?

   Are yo just biased and hateful against Logan Paul that you are just sweeping under the rug other evils more harmful than Logan's actions?

[Chrisd]

On 17-9-2023 at 2:42 AM, Leo Gura said:

You never hear stories of a man crying: "I was drunk and she raped me."

I was in love and she used me

[Alex M]

1 hour ago, Tanz said:

Japan has insanely high suicide rates.

You will find that Japan is much lower than a lot countries worldwide (like South Korea for example which is almost double Japan per 100k).

[Tanz]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

Are yo just biased and hateful against Logan Paul that you are just sweeping under the rug other evils more harmful than Logan's actions?

Not at all. He's unconsciously ignorant and not malicious at all. I'm not saying suicide is a nobal thing. Personally it's immature to take your life because you can't please your companies desires. But I must say I respect people that dedicate their lives to one thing. 

Logans behavior is the problematic problem which reflects to the arrogance of the west. 

The harm of between 2 people on personal matters is not as bad as a Chinese man going to America and burning a flag in front of the white house. Or going to a Dubai embassy to burn a Koran for example. 

Had Logan gone to Japan and actually spend time talking about suicide with a Japanese person that would have been different than what he did. He was using people's suffering for views.

These problems that I'm talking about reflect larger problems than inflicting harm to one person as the other inflicts harm to a nation.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Tanz

[Alex M]

5 hours ago, Tanz said:

Youtubes sales would not be hurt, they punished Logan Paul for filming dead people that committed suicide which is arguably more dangerous than having someone who's possibly committed a crime 15 years ago speak on their platform.  Eventually they put him back on their platform because he was making lots of money for them.    

It would be if the advertisers decided to pause the monthly social campaigns and shift the ad spend elsewhere. e.g. Let's say Apple or Disney decided they were going to pause YouTube advertising because they didn't want user backlash or their brands appearing on Russell Brands YouTube videos; you'd be talking of YouTube losing around $30-40 million dollars a month. That's just from two companies. Was the decision to demonetise a bit strong sure. But survival supersedes it.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Alex M

[Tanz]

@Alex M advertisers care more about views than anything. Where ever there are eyes they will advertise.

Moderna sponsored the US open and even the winning shot from Novak who was denied from entering a country because he didn't want to take the jab.

Brand channel is growing so obviously some people like him. 

Watching a show like Kardashian is trashy but plenty of women love watching them. I don't expect people to not watch it. Clearly it offers them value.

As long as companies can make money they will. 

YouTube is still running ads on his channel by the way. They just aren't sharing the profit with him.

[Danioover9000]

@Tanz It's great you answered one of my questions but.

1 hour ago, Tanz said:

Not at all. He's unconsciously ignorant and not malicious at all. I'm not saying suicide is a nobal thing. Personally it's immature to take your life because you can't please your companies desires. But I must say I respect people that dedicate their lives to one thing. 

Logans behavior is the problematic problem which reflects to the arrogance of the west. 

The harm of between 2 people on personal matters is not as bad as a Chinese man going to America and burning a flag in front of the white house. Or going to a Dubai embassy to burn a Koran for example. 

Had Logan gone to Japan and actually spend time talking about suicide with a Japanese person that would have been different than what he did. He was using people's suffering for views.

These problems that I'm talking about reflect larger problems than inflicting harm to one person as the other inflicts harm to a nation.

   Don't dodge the other questions, unless you have good reason to?

3 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Tanz

   Are you assuming a mental state for the majority of Logan Paul's fans and viewers? Do you have data to show how high the suicidal rates are in Japan?

   So Logan Paul, a white guy, goes to an Asian country to do a social media influencer video, to point a cultural problem as sensitive as suicide, is as wrong as colonizers that came to countries to change their culture, how are the two wrongs here equivalent? Are you being a bit racist and ethnocentric here?

   Speaking of racism, you just have assumed that Japanese are 'extremely proud' people that rather kill themselves than not try their best? So you've characterized Japanese people suiciding themselves as some noble thing rather than them 'doing their best', and ignore the imperialist Japan during WW2, when allied to Germany, expand onto other countries? What about the samurai time period? What about other parts of Japanese history, and their well known hard working attitude, of being very detailed orientated? Heard of Mitsubishi, Subaru, Toyota?

   Are yo just biased and hateful against Logan Paul that you are just sweeping under the rug other evils more harmful than Logan's actions?

 

[Danioover9000]

   Coming back to feminine Russell Brand, assuming he's likely to be guilty, why should we care what happens to him prior? After all, based on his actions, his kharma, his drug and sex addiction, it's a statistical likelihood that he might've raped some of those women. Why are some here not showing some support, or understanding or empathy for these poor women? All they have is the me too movement and some journalists willing to peruse some form of justice for them, why are we apprehensive about justice for these women? Are we biased toward Russell Brand?

[Tanz]

5 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

how are the two wrongs here equivalent? Are you being a bit racist and ethnocentric here?

They are comparisons is one sin is lack of interest to understand a culture and the other in Brands case if he does get found guilty is lack of understand to an individual.  Culturally insensitive actions at the behest of someone's suffering is just bad and feeds into American stereotypes.  
The reason why I brought up Logan Paul was because he broke clear guidelines that google has explicitly warned content creators while Brand's content did not break any guidelines at all.  

 

5 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

imperialist Japan during WW2, when allied to Germany, expand onto other countries?

If you are talking about imperialism, UK, Spain, French, have done a better job conquesting, they took entire continents.  The Japanese took Korea, parts of China, and Taiwan.  As of date America done a better job than all its processors.  

[Danioover9000]

@Tanz

28 minutes ago, Tanz said:

They are comparisons is one sin is lack of interest to understand a culture and the other in Brands case if he does get found guilty is lack of understand to an individual.  Culturally insensitive actions at the behest of someone's suffering is just bad and feeds into American stereotypes.  
The reason why I brought up Logan Paul was because he broke clear guidelines that google has explicitly warned content creators while Brand's content did not break any guidelines at all.  

 

If you are talking about imperialism, UK, Spain, French, have done a better job conquesting, they took entire continents.  The Japanese took Korea, parts of China, and Taiwan.  As of date America done a better job than all its processors.  

   Would you say that Russel Brand's content, if applying Actualized.org forum guidelines instead of YT, is breaking guidelines? I at least can see misinformation, conspiracy theories, Covid-19 misinformation, spreading some hoaxes, to namea few.

   The Japanese example was to counter your portrayal of them, in your earlier statement you made them sound weak minded people.

[Leo Gura]

Banning Brand for his politics is a bad move.

[Tanz]

20 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

Would you say that Russel Brand's content, if applying Actualized.org forum guidelines instead of YT, is breaking guidelines? I at least can see misinformation, conspiracy theories, Covid-19 misinformation, spreading some hoaxes, to namea few.

I dont think his viewers would have changed their stance on vaccines whether or not he even existed in this world.  Aaron Rogers, Novak Djokovic would still end up making the same decisions, even if we were to blast all dissenting voice in existence.  
One of the hardest things to do is to change people, anyone that is involved in self-help, therapy or anything regarding people know its nearly impossible to actualize people.  The people that are attracted to Brand already have their views, watching him only re-enforces them.  

26 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

The Japanese example was to counter your portrayal of them, in your earlier statement you made them sound weak minded people.

What gives them strength also weakens them.  People in western society can learn about worshipping your craft to the point where you put  your all into it while the Japanese people can learn to express their suffering by opening up to people and be outspoken about them.  
Logan Paul is offly shallow and if he is more mature, he would go back to Japan and do more thoughtful content.  For example, talk to some Japanese people and ask them honestly how they felt about him doing such things.  He's not capable of doing such things at this time and he can make more money doing what he is doing now.  I basically used Paul because he fits into the stereotype that most of the world see's American's as.    

[Consept]

6 hours ago, Tanz said:

One of the hardest things to do is to change people, anyone that is involved in self-help, therapy or anything regarding people know its nearly impossible to actualize people.  The people that are attracted to Brand already have their views, watching him only re-enforces them.  

I'd disagree somewhat here. From what I've seen Brands charisma and presentation style can attract a lot of people and then can serve as a pipeline to views that they may nor have previously held. For example someone might just be vaccine hesitant, then start watching a few of his videos which then builds up trust as they tend to agree with him as his takes are well argued but heavily biased. He makes a video on why Putin might be right and because of the trust built up the person goes along with this view, they no longer disagree with any of his views, as you can see from the comments. 

It's hard to change people with self-help because you have to do the hard things and get out of your comfort zone. Brand in this case, provides a comfort zone where people don't really need to think for themselves, they just put their trust in him. 

Even so, I still wouldn't ban him for his politics, just making the point that he is definitely converting people to his side of the fence. 

 

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

7 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Banning Brand for his politics is a bad move.

   Okay, but some of his political takes are so biased and anti mainstreams though like bad political takes, even some of it is conspiracy theories and misinformation similar to Joe Rogan. If I'm not mistaken YouTube just demonetized his Channel, I don't think it was banned because he's Channel was still on 2 days ago, didn't ban his Channel yet.

   I don't know how YouTube would have handled this situation, maybe give him warning points or a temp ban. I'd agree partly that they should've held back until an official investigation is launched, but my guess is that his Channel was mass reported.

   If you were in YouTube's position, how would you handle this situation?

[Danioover9000]

@Consept

55 minutes ago, Consept said:

I'd disagree somewhat here. From what I've seen Brands charisma and presentation style can attract a lot of people and then can serve as a pipeline to views that they may nor have previously held. For example someone might just be vaccine hesitant, then start watching a few of his videos which then builds up trust as they tend to agree with him as his takes are well argued but heavily biased. He makes a video on why Putin might be right and because of the trust built up the person goes along with this view, they no longer disagree with any of his views, as you can see from the comments. 

It's hard to change people with self-help because you have to do the hard things and get out of your comfort zone. Brand in this case, provides a comfort zone where people don't really need to think for themselves, they just put their trust in him. 

Even so, I still wouldn't ban him for his politics, just making the point that he is definitely converting people to his side of the fence. 

 

   Damn, what you just described for Russel Brand is a cult leader, and cult like dynamics. Another reason why certain platforms of views are dangerous.

   Semi disagree with the ban part, maybe demonetized or shadow banned.