RADIOSeptember 19, 2023

DISTURBING move? YouTube DEMONETIZES Russell Brand after allegations

YouTube has demonetized comedian Russell Brand's account after allegations dropped that he sexually assaulted and raped multiple women. The BBC has also announced an internal review of Brand's time at the network and is "urgently looking into" issues raised in a Channel 4 documentary on Brand. Glenn points out the apparent hypocrisy of the outlet, which had no problem paying Brand, despite his alleged behavior — which he has denied — being an "open secret," according to one accuser. Plus, Glenn and Stu discuss how disturbing the companies' quick reactions have been, given that Brand hasn't even been charged with or convicted of anything yet. If YouTube can demonetize someone for accusations of "off-platform behavior" from over a decade ago, Glenn says, then "we live in Salem Witch Trial times."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: So Russell Brand, is in trouble.

Now, here's something -- I want to read this, from the BBC.

From the BBC. Russell Brand resurfaced clips, give a sobering reminder of noughties culture.

The noughties are the noughts, you know. As the 00s of the early -- of the early century.

The early part of the -- the zeros. The noughties. We're being very noughty right now.

From BBC. The noughties aren't so long ago, that it's possible to dismiss them as a different age. There are parts of the decade that British culture would rather forget.

Russell Brand was at the center of a messy celebrity scene of the 2000s that now feels like the cool Britannia Party gone sour.

The recent allegations against the comedian, and resurfaced clips of things he said and did on the air and on stage, have provided a sobering reminder of the seedier side of the pop and media culture in that decade.

Okay. All right.

First of all, Russell Brand is kind of like their Howard Stern. Okay. Okay.

You didn't know exactly what you were getting in those days with Russell Brand. Okay?

Just think Howard Stern. Now, it's provided a sobering reminder of the seedier side of pop media culture in that decade.

Could I just ask the BBC to turn on the radio and listen to the lyrics of songs, they're now playing. Because I guarantee, there's something playing on the BBC about somebody's butt doing something.

Among the claims. Now, listen to this. Resurfaced clips is what this is all about.

Among the claims in channel four's recent dispatched investigation. Into the star. There was a clip from his BBC radio two show in 2004, that seemed to have gone largely unnoticed at the time.

In it Brand interviewed Jimmy Savile. Now, Jimmy Savile was a big, big radio host.

You know, the --

STU: Top of the pops, right?

GLENN: Top of the pops. Everybody loved Jimmy salve I will.

They found out, he's a child predator.

And was molesting kids, in the hospital, while he was visiting. Review, but nobody knows this.

At the time.

Among claims Channel 4's recent dispatches, shows him on BBC, in 2007.

In it, Brand interviewed Jimmy Savile and apparently offered up his very attractive assistant to go meet him naked.

Sound like Howard Stern?

STU: Right.

GLENN: Okay. This is in 2007, he said this to the BBC host, of.

Of top of the pops. Another BBC host said, you go ahead and take my assistant here. She'll go get naked. Funny. He said, naughty word. Naughty. Get it?

Okay. When did they expose, so to speak, Jimmy Savile, being a child predator? When was that, Stu?

STU: 2012.

GLENN: 2012. So something that went unnoticed, in 2007.

STU: Because no one knew about the accusation.

GLENN: No one knew about this. Okay.

While the clip was from before salve I will had been exposed as a serial sexual predator, it scarcely believed now that it was broadcast Britain's biggest radio station.

You know, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. Not that Russell Brand said that. That's not really the problem, BBC. The problem is you hired that guy and held him up as a hero for decades on the BBC.

There are several clips of Brand pushing the line between outrageous and offensive stuff that were used in the Channel 4 documentary on a Saturday.

Okay.

They're doing an exposé, on what they aired twenty years ago, and making Russell Brand into the bad guy.

You aired it. You aired it. It's like Westwood 1, coming in and saying, let me tell you something.

I want to show you some videotape, of what Howard Stern was doing.

Yeah. Because you were paying him to do it.

How is that a problem for him, and not you?

I don't know. It's crazy.

STU: Ask they actually are sort of doing that to Stern right now. There are definitely people out there looking for --

GLENN: Looking. You spent five minutes, and you could find it. Of course.

STU: Just over the September 11th, you know, anniversary. Happened to stumble upon this Howard Stern Show, from September 11th.

GLENN: Wow.

STU: It is a different era. The -- the -- the difference in -- as that's going on. They're watching buildings in realtime. It's a fascinating thing to watch from a historical perspective. But the anger on the show, and the way that they were talking. The words they were saying.

The things that came out of their mouths.
It was --

GLENN: Were they singing songs about doing things with people's butts?

STU: They were not.

They were doing that right before the planes actually hit the building.

But it was interesting to hear the occasion -- Robin Quivers, who was ready to nuke the entire Middle East.

It was like -- it was pretty interesting to watch. You go back and watch those shows. Look, it was a different time.

You're going to judge these by today's standards. That's always dumb.

It's always dumb to go back to a previous era, and judge it by today's standards. It's always dumb to do that.

And it does seem to be what everyone wants to do.

GLENN: Well, I just can't take the employer, doing a documentary on how outrageous he was. And how he should be stoned to death, at the time they were paying him to do those things. I mean, that takes quite the balls.

STU: Well, and the BBC in particular, is in the Russell Brand situation, is specifically accused. Like, they are --

GLENN: They were --

STU: They were saying, they were helping it along. That's the accusation.

GLENN: Like listening to a documentary on BBC.

STU: Right. Like they were sending cars to pick up the girls that were 16 years old for Russell Brand.

GLENN: Which, by the way, was not illegal at the time.

It sounds horrible, but it wasn't illegal at the time.

STU: And no one was saying it was illegal. Not necessarily the best --

GLENN: Now, why is this all happening to him? Why? Why? Why?

STU: It's a good question.

I think there's a very obvious answer to it.

GLENN: Go ahead.

STU: Well, when he was famous and married to Katy Perry and doing all this, there was no news of these accusations. He was known as a bad guy. Right? Like a very promiscuous guy. To his own telling. He was addicted to drugs. He was addicted to alcohol. He was addicted to sex.

GLENN: Has a changed all of that.

STU: He's changed all of that. And has become a commentator who has been skeptical of some of the things you're not allowed to be skeptical of, like COVID. Climate change. ESG standards.

GLENN: Yeah. And the World Economic Forum is his biggest thing.

STU: Now he's been --

GLENN: Now he's being targeted for that.

STU: Look, of course, you would agree, if he committed horrible crimes against people, he should be punished for them, even if he has reformed his character.

He still is held responsible for crimes.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

STU: But this does not seem to be what's -- it may not be what's going on.

GLENN: We have a hard time in this culture. Where we just make accusations, and we destroy people.

STU: Agreed.

GLENN: Now, listen, Russell Brand has now been demonetized by YouTube.

Now, what does that mean?

Russell Brand makes his money on his YouTube videos. Okay?

So they have just demonetized him.

So they won't sell or give him any money for what he's doing.

The BBC said it removed some programs featuring him from its streaming services.

So they were still paying for the guy.

Now, it looks like YouTube is doing the same, because the quote from YouTube is absolutely amazing.

Where is it? Where is it? Brand took his online social media platforms. Saying it was a coordinated attack.

Yes, it was. They said that now. I can't find the exact quote.

STU: While you're looking for that. Can we talk about quickly what the line is here?

Because there is a process that goes on.

When you're going to be convicted of a crime. And that begins with an accusation. Then comes that investigation.

Then comes a charge, filed against you.

Then comes a conviction, that comes a sentence. Right?

Why can't these companies just draw a line? Like make a line. What's the line?

A charge. Right? If someone gets criminally charged with something, we're going to pull them off of our service.

GLENN: Is that fair?

STU: I don't know. I think --

GLENN: We used to believe it was a conviction.

STU: That's where I would go. If you're convicted of a crime. Even if you might say you're innocent, we have to have some way of sorting this out. That's what our legal system is for.

GLENN: And if you want to do that. If you want to take it off early, just pay the person. Pay the person. So you don't destroy their life.

STU: The NFL, you're under contract. And someone comes up with an accusation, and they think they need to pull you off. They pull you out. They put you on the commissioner's suspended list. But you're still getting paid. Because, look, there's no conviction.

Nothing has been proven. If you're proven in a court of law to be guilty of a crime, It makes sense. That is the line, probably.

Instead, what it is, if someone accuses you -- now, of course, people have been saying bad things about Russell Brand for a very long time.

He's been saying bad things about himself, for a very, very long time. All the money that was coming through was fine. Until this news story had been written.

He was not charged with a crime. Let alone convicted of one.

He may be charged and convicted later.

But he hasn't been yet.

GLENN: Correct.

He said his relationships were always consensual.

He was accused of rape and sexual assault between 2006 and 2013.

He denies the claims. Was any -- were any charges filed?

Did anybody go to the police at the time? Anything.

Anything. He says, no.

I don't want to judge, because I don't know the man. We're not in a courtroom.

But here's what YouTube said. You ready for this standard, Stu?

See if this is -- if this is a little earlier than conviction.

If a creator's off platform behavior harms our users, our employees, or ecosystem, we take action.

Now, I don't know how his off-platform behavior in 2006.

STU: Existed.

GLENN: Yeah. Harmed your users, employees, or ecosystem.

What they're saying is, if somebody calls in our ecosystem, and says, I can't believe you guys are doing this. I'm not going to advertise. Or I'm not going to provide that chair for your conference room. I'm not going to do it. Because you will keep him up. That harms the ecosystem, and they can take action. This is -- we live in the Salem witch trial tames.

STU: It's true, though.

And, you know what, though. I can understand how these companies react this way.

Going back to your book, Dark Future. And the Great Reset.

And then great example of this is Twitter. You know, you go to use Twitter or whatever the heck they're calling it this week.

And, I mean, if I get another ad for Cheech and Chong gummies. Like every one of their ads are just trash. Because there's no companies on there anymore. They've all just left. Because Elon Musk said, you're allowed to speak freely. So all the companies just left. I mean, he himself is saying, that revenue is down 80 percent.

GLENN: And he himself is being charged with crimes that are not crimes. He's charged with not hiring new migrants that don't have green cards, don't have anything.

That is the DOJ and the Pentagon's rule for a rocket company!

EXCLUSIVE: Chip Roy Explains His FIERY Rejection of Spending Bill

According to the media, there’s a big fight going on between Republicans over the House’s new slimmed-down continuing resolution spending bill. Some, including President-elect Donald Trump, wanted the bill to pass. But others, like Texas Representative Chip Roy, argued that it still wasn’t ready. However, is the Republican “unity coalition” really crumbling, like the media claims? Rep. Chip Roy joins Glenn to explain what’s really going on. He argues that he IS trying to give Trump and DOGE a 100-day “runway” to fix the country. But he makes the case that, by increasing the debt ceiling by $5 trillion without agreeing on other cuts, this bill gives bad actors the ability to be an “obstacle” to Trump’s agenda further down the line. Plus, he reveals to Glenn that he believes some of these bad actors LEAKED false information about his stance to Mar-a-Lago.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN:

I think we have a great opportunity today. To show you how to have a -- tough conversation, with friends, friends. Where you deeply disagree on something.

But you know that their intent is good. They know my intent is good. Or our intent is good.

And we actually have the same end goal, but we disagree on the path. And we're going to walk away friends.

Chip Roy is joining us today. And, Chip, I love you. And I always will. And I agree with your, we've got to cut spending. We have to. But Liz Wheeler is with me. And we've been talking about it all morning. It's the -- the -- the -- the system of DOGE and Trump, the call-out to the world, in saying, you've got to surrender the Capitol. You know, the bad guys are in and about to take all the money.

Surround, and tell them, come out with your hands up. And that happened. And we scored a massive win, in an entirely new way.

Ask then you stood on principle, one we both agree with.

And it failed!

And so here's -- here's what Liz and I were talking about. Here's what we want to say to you.

And then get your response.

LIZ: Hi, Congressman Roy, this is the way I see it. I want your take on it. I love you. I think you're one of the best members of Congress. I disagree with you on the process that's happening. And I think that is the difference. The process. We elected Donald Trump to be a disruptor. Because Republican members of Congress for decades have been telling they're fiscal conservatives. They want to decrease the debt SEAL. It hasn't happened.

It hasn't -- it hasn't been done. And so Donald Trump comes in with Elon Musk, and uses this DOGE process to first identify these pieces of garbage in the first 1500-page bill. And take those things to the people. We took them to members of Congress. Congress said, okay. We'll listen to you.

So that new process was very effective.

And my question to you is: Once that process was proved to be effective. Which I think is exciting and wonderful.

How do we bridge this divide, with you, to say, okay.

Let's put some faith in this new process. And trust Elon Musk and Donald Trump and the Dow Jones process, to eventually address the debt ceiling, but get this done right now?

GLENN: And not blind trust. Chip.

CHIP: So appreciate you guys. Appreciate being on the show. Particular order. I have to go through a couple of things.

GLENN: Yep.

CHIP: Number one, it's important to remember that my job and my duty is to the Constitution, to God, and the people I represent. I told them, when I came to Washington, I would not -- I would not let the credit card and the debt ceiling and the borrowing of the United States without the spending restraints necessary to offset it.

GLENN: Okay.

CHIP: Right now, all we have are promises and ideas and notions. What I know, that neither of you respectfully no, and that none of your listeners respectfully no are the people that are in the room, that I was in with yesterday. And the day before, who are recalcitrant.

And do not want to do the spending cuts that we need to do.

That I believe the president and the DOGE guys. And everybody want to do.

My job, is to force that through the meat grinder. To demand that we do our damn job. Okay?

GLENN: Okay. So hang on. Okay. So wait. Wait. You're right. You're right. You're right. Go ahead.

CHIP: Number thee, when we were going through the bill, I'm glad the bill dropped from 1,550 pages to 116 pages. Three-quarters of Twitter or X or whatever you want to call it, have been out there spreading false facts that we supported a bad bill and didn't like the better bill.

That's not true. But let's be Lear. The 1400 pages that were cut out. It's a panacea.

There were some good stuff in there. There were some bad stuff in there. There was a lot of disinformation.

There wasn't a $70,000 pay raise. There was a 3,000-dollar pay raise.

I didn't support any pay raise. I didn't support a lot of the stuff in there.

But there's a lot of misinformation. And here's the thing: The 116 pages that were left, and I opposed violently the first bill. I was leading the charge on fighting and killing the first bill.

GLENN: And I love you.

LIZ: The second bill for 116 pages. Turned off -- turned off the pay go requirement. That we slash 1.7 trillion automatically.

And added a 5 trillion that are increase.

My view was, I could not support that, without a clear understanding of what cuts we would get, in mandatory spending next year. And undo any of the Inflation Reduction Act.

The undoing of the student loans. The undoing of the crap with the food stamps.

And everything else. I yield back.

GLENN: Okay. I yield back.

Chip, you're not in a hostile room. We love you. And we agree with your end goals. It's our end goal too. We didn't make that promise that you made to the people that voted for you. So we have more wiggle room here.

But you say -- I think our big difference is, you say, I know the guys in the room.

You're right. You do. And we -- we ceded that earlier today on the show.

You are -- one of us is wrong on trust.

I don't trust any of the weasels in Washington.

But I think Donald Trump and Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have earned enough trust, to get a grace period, here for the first -- maybe the first year.

Or at least six months.

To turn the economy around, and also reduce the size of the government.

And totally flip this thing.

And I know, as somebody who is -- you know, run a company, mainly into a ground. But run a company, and have to switch it, in the middle, and totally reshuffle. That -- that actually costs money, while you're doing it, to bridge the gap.

Because you have to fill up holes while you're filling in the gap.

You don't trust the people in the room. Neither do we.

But we do trust the system that worked on Wednesday with DOGE and Donald Trump.

Where do we disagree?

Can you give them --

CHIP: We don't disagree. And yesterday morning, I was making that precise argument in a room full of conservatives and then a follow-up room with people who will call it, less conservatives.

GLENN: Republican. Yes.

CHIP: And so we were making this argument. And then someone infamously. Something leaked out of the room, somehow out to Mar-a-Lago. That I was being resistant. Because I was negotiating trying to get the agreement to achieve the objective that you just said. I was trying to get, okay. In fact, yesterday morning, I made the argument to a group of conservatives. We need to give the president runway. We need to give him his first 100 days. We need to appreciate JD, and Vivek, and all the people -- and everybody involved. For the president to achieve the objective.

But to get there. We have to make sure that the guys in the room, that are an obstacle to that, don't have the ability to block it.

Because information flow matters. And when those guys tell the president, they can't achieve X.

Then the president will not achieve X. Our job was to force and demand, guys, we need actual understanding of what the cuts will be.

And because otherwise, we're asking us to accept a 5 trillion-dollar limit in our credit card increase. In exchange for nothing!

Literally, in exchange for nothing, but -- but hope.

So our job was to force that change.

Unfortunately, while I was trying to make the argument that we needed something in order to get the votes, someone leaked that down to Mar-a-Lago, and the president reacted.

But now I have to now manage that.

GLENN: Right. I know. I know.

CHIP: They're trying to enforce change in town.

GLENN: So hang on.

We have to leave this. Because I'm going to run against the clock.

I could talk to you all day about this. You were in a meeting this morning about J.D. Vance. Can you tell us anything about that meeting?

CHIP: That meeting happened, because despite what happened yesterday, I'm trying to get this done. Last night, talking to JD, we worked to get this meeting done. We had some good progress this morning.

But there still remains people concerned about spending. That we can work out, what agreement we can reach. On what spending cuts. We can actually get next year, in exchange for giving the vote on a debt ceiling increase.

So it remains fluid. Progress was made. But we have to keep working on it.

And I left that meeting to talk to you. Soil get an update in a minute.

GLENN: Thank you for that, by the way.

I hear there is a new bill that may be coming today.

Is that the one you're talking about?

Or is this another bill that could be another nightmare?

CHIP: Despite other people leaking crap, I refused. I can't say, because it's not been decided by the speaker.

And it's not right to talk about things they're talking about in private meetings.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's -- it's this speaker. I mean, is he really the speaker anymore, Chip, really?

CHIP: We need to hear what bill we need to get forward. And I can't talk about the private meetings. But, look, I'm going to keep fighting for what I promised people that I represent.

I'm going to fight to cut spending. I am going to represent article one.

I'm going to support the president's agenda, but we've got to do that together.

GLENN: Okay.

Chip, thank you.

I think we can -- I think we agree, but I await to see what that means to you. Because we may just have to agree to disagree on this.

But I love you. And I still want you to replace Cornyn.

CHIP: The short version is, for inflation's sake, we cannot increase the debt ceiling $5 trillion without knowing what we're getting for it.

And I don't think anybody should disagree with that.

GLENN: But you don't disagree that Elon Musk and Trump and Vivek are serious about gutting the system.

CHIP: I believe that is their objective. I believe there are obstacles to that objective. And I need to know the sincerity of how we deal with those obstacles, both structural, and human. And we have to figure that out. And that's my job.