Forum menu
Both equally appalling stories, but one celeb appears to “beat” a large number of senior NHS staff
The Dispatches programme took a year to make. When did the NHS thing come to light?
Andrew Tate may only hook 0.5% of those who see any of his content, but that's still a massive number of people.
It is the influencer equivalent of phishing or, from back in the day, mass mailings for timeshare.
Tate, Brand, Peterson et al rely on a small percentage of people being vulnerable enough to be sucked in. It is an utterly cynical worldview, but it guarantees a few messed up cultists will stand up for them. There's one born every minute.
You think Tait would have influence about a holiday film getting made or a TV series getting commissioned, or ensure a newspaper article is written or not?
Is that what I said?
will this lead to a #metoo moment ? if other victims feel empowered enough to go the police (and if the Danni Minogue stories are true) there may be some high profile victims.
<span style="caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #eeeeee;">What I found a huge amount more shocking recently was the report about NHS consultants abusing and assaulting female trainee surgeons, often in operating theatres and presumably in front of other staff. This seemed to take up less news space than the current R Brand story amazingly, since it appears to be systemic and involving large numbers of women.</span>
As an NHS doctor, I was disappointed but not surprised in the least.
I bet he's breaking out the emergency box this afternoon.
@convert Tate has his hooks into people well beyond the teenage boy demographic. He and folk like Peterson hold a far broader appeal then has been credited. Toby Young/ Laurence Fox and the free speech union all sit on the same end of the spectrum of reactionary, regressive thinking. Tate and brand share a very similar mode of operation - that of the radical cult. Similar conversations around de-radicalisation as were had over a decade ago could and should happen today.
Peterson is very smart, and some very smart men (not met a women taken in by him yet) fall for his approach long term. The number of otherwise very savvy guys that will tell you he has been misrepresented by others and is worth listening to is quite scary. Brand on the other hand seems to have a shelf life… people get excited by him for a while, but his own contradictions while bandwagon jumping cannot easily be ignored, so fewer people seem to go along with him for long. He has the charisma but not the smarts.
I lasted about 5 minutes of one of his YouTube videos-
Not about Brand, but might help explain "why not report / why now?"
https://twitter.com/FlopsyPickle/status/1703369230190580202
Kramer if you’re not surprised, surely there are enough decent people like yourself (hopefully!) that are reporting this? Why does it take an external analysis to bring it to light?
Boris Johnson is very similar.
I agree. But Brand isn’t as smart as either of them, and doesn’t have the techniques that they do when it comes to obsfucation and stringing people along longer term. He has the presence to hold an audience, and for any 3 month period of his cult leader behaviour people go along with him. He doesn’t have their shelf life, the ability to shift what he’s selling in a believable manner that Johnson in particular had, and you can just use comparisons of his own words to condemn him as a con artist. As always there are some people that don’t want to see through him, but they are far rarer than for Peterson in my experience. Johnson is more of a busted flush… but look where he got to, and how the money is following in now… more “successful” than any of us will ever be if status, attention and money are the goals.
@andylc reporting it does very little. Lip service is paid, but basically the path of least resistance is almost always chosen.
Personally, I have to pick my battles and choose how and where to spend my energy. Fortunately in my current situation I’m not aware of any sexual harassment occurring.
The last time I had a serious concern, I had to push beyond what would be considered reasonable in order to get some action taken. Even then, I personally feel that the outcome was less than satisfactory.
Long story short, I had to push so hard to get people to take action about something, that actually it could easily have been misconstrued as a vendetta on my part.
As in any organisation it’s a combination of status quo bias, people’s workload being too much, and not wanting to rock the boat.
In the NHS, the whole culture from the Department of Health and NHS England down is inherently unhealthy IMO.
@kelvin - Brand is similar in his approach. He uses flamboyant language to make things sound cleverer than they are. Johnson uses his classical education and Peterson uses psycho-philosophical mumbo-jumbo to similar effect.
It truly is a modern phenomenon
I would say the breadth and depth of them is modern, and how quickly they’re spread, but Q-anon is just the blood liable (perhaps the world’s oldest conspiracy theory) bought into the 21st C, and for all their immediacy no one really care anymore about the “fact” that Germans were spreading disease in American cities in the run up to the invasion that was going to take place in 1917.
Just been reading this article about the internet and the growth of conspiracy theories, much of the early internet material has been lost, the earliest reference to the Rothschilds and dark practices is 1994, IIRC, but it covers the likes of Alex Jones and his development of the conspiracy chat show.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-internet-never-met-a-rothschild-conspiracy-it-cant-love
Brand is similar in his approach. He uses flamboyant language to make things sound cleverer than they are. Johnson uses his classical education and Peterson uses psycho-philosophical mumbo-jumbo to similar effect.
If these people can get their hooks into 0.1% of the UK population, that is nearly 70,000 people. Events of the last ten years or so suggest that very suggestible people constitute much more than 0.1%. It's a numbers game.
"i’m also really not a fan of this whole trial by media circus and think the introduction of a statute of limitations as many other countries have would improve the situation"
1) California, which is where one of the alleged assaults allegedly took place, has a statute of limitations.
2) England and Wales doesn't have a fixed statute of limitations, but it does have strong protections against abuse of process - the state doesnt and cant dredge up old stuff its known about for ages. And in any case the more aged the offence, the weaker the evidence will be, and the less likely the allegation will pass the prosecutors two point test, and them convince a judge or jury. The prisons are not filled with people convicted on historic charges.
3) in any case, an SoL would not stop media outlets reporting on stories. There are already overly aggressive defamation laws to protect the likes of Brand from false reporting.
<span style="color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; background-color: #eeeeee;">i’m also really not a fan of this whole trial by media circus</span>
Since two media companies are in the firing line for mishandling this affair, I think it's totally appropriate.
@roger_mellie I think this quote from the Atlantic article on Marjorie Taylor-Greene sums things up best:
She has no choice but to be the person her followers think she is, because her power is contingent on theirs.
I think it’s true about a lot of these people.
A lot of them have in common that they seem to be fading from attention for various reasons (getting older, career not working out, had their 15 minutes of fame) and they find this new audience with an almost insatiable desire for nonsense. However once they start down that route there’s no going back, because for the majority of that audience, they’re not interested in reality, only their comforting fantasy.
Look who’s supporting Brand on X
In the wake of allegations of rape and sexual abuse against comedian and social influencer Russell Brand, Tesla owner Elon Musk, social media influencer Andrew Tate and political commenter Tucker Carlson have came in support of him.
In response to Brand’s video suggesting he was targeted as part of a coordinated attack for his right-wing criticism of the media, Musk wrote on X: “Of course. They don’t like competition."
Going off on a bit of a tangent with the right wingers, but as others say, there's a lot of weirdness coming from that side that's influencing too many, Peterson i would say is intelligent and wins most of his arguments because he studies it beforehand and uses a lot of information and facts to sway the argument to his side, which the opposition don't tend to do too often unfortunately, he basically picks weak opponents and plays the player, hence his following.
As for the Dispatches show last night, have to say it was a bit disappointing, you break it down and it was a lot of 'alleged' statements being made, not even sure why the comedian at the end was wheeled out, he had to use alleged as well, and at best he had hearsay to add. All this show has done is open up the media circus, which will now mean a lot of the crackpots coming out of the woodwork and making daft allegations, destroying the credibility of any actual victims. We live in a world where everyone wants their 15 minutes, and the amount of people who will try and use this will be vast i'd guess, it'll keep the papers going for months.
As stated earlier, is he a wrong un, haven't a clue, we need more than that show provided, but what i do know is that the likes of Russell Brand is what this world creates, as someone said regarding if money changes you, money allows you to become more of who you really are, it's the same with fame.
The UK has some of the strongest libel laws in the world, let him sue if it’s not true.
it was a lot of ‘alleged’ statements being made
Because if you don't use phrasing like "alleged rapist" prior to a trial taking place then you're an open goal for a libel/slander case with a side order of risking perverting any trial. Have you never watched any news broadcast ever?
is he a wrong un, haven’t a clue, we need more than that show provided
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Watching the report, did he come across as a fine, upstanding citizen to you?
However once they start down that route there’s no going back, because for the majority of that audience, they’re not interested in reality, only their comforting fantasy.
Yeah, but fame (sort of) and attention, appearance fees etc.
Many so-called celebs are not interested in anything other than maintaining their profile. If that means demeaning yourself to sucker some mugs then so what?
I see he’s ramping up the conspiracy theory nonsense - makes you think - to further egg on the tinfoil-helmeted hard-of-thinking
No doubt it’s the government, the CIA, Bill Gates, big pharma and MOSSAD who’ve cooked the whole thing up to try and discredit him exposing the truth about them?
which will now mean a lot of the crackpots coming out of the woodwork and making daft allegations, destroying the credibility of any actual victims.
Rubbish. And thatbwas the attitude of the publisher's lawyer that said the person informing them of Brand's poor behaviour was just out looking for money.
As for the Dispatches show last night, have to say it was a bit disappointing, you break it down and it was a lot of ‘alleged’ statements being made, not even sure why the comedian at the end was wheeled out, he had to use alleged as well, and at best he had hearsay to add.
If the use of allegations in such a case needs explaining then perhaps you should not bother
If the use of allegations in such a case needs explaining then perhaps you should not bother
Yep, allegations were the order of the day, but when the writing came up, it was 'friends' or 'family' corroborate this, it wasn't exactly the Prince Andrew interview, or Jimmy Saville with Louis Theroux, all it leaves now is a media circus.
No doubt it’s the government, the CIA, Bill Gates, big pharma and MOSSAD who’ve cooked the whole thing up to try and discredit him exposing the truth about them?
You missed off 5G masts, the Clintons and the owner of a pizza place in Little Rock.
But yeah, loonies will be loonying.
, it wasn’t exactly the Prince Andrew interview, or Jimmy Saville with Louis Theroux,
Thank goodness for that. The Prince Andrew interview proved absolutely nothing except he is a bullshitter, and Theroux managed to identify precisely zero of Savile's victims or crimes. (To be fair to Theroux, he made an extremely thoughtful programme later in which he examined his own failure, and he is not an investigative journalist).
Ive just seen Barrymores Tweet response to RB "This us what they do"
Im not sure the press planted the dead guy in the pool. Although itd probably be dismissed as a Fed plant these days.
Im not sure the press planted the dead guy in the pool. Although itd probably be dismissed as a Fed plant these days.
Nah, a kamikaze woke activist, surely?
Makes you think
Not necessarily a good thing in people with an overactive imagination and a chip on their shoulder.
it wasn’t exactly the Prince Andrew interview, or Jimmy Saville with Louis Theroux,
You're comparing two interviews with a documentary investigation about someone who declined to appear on the programme. Does your apple pie taste a bit citrussy?
What did/do you expect?
all it leaves now is a media circus.
Well, thank that goodness that never happened with the other two. Or anyone else.
MOSSAD would do a proper job I suspect.
Tbh the BBC need to have long look at how they let his production company run his radio show, brand will just be more vile and unhinged after this.
The consenting defense was to be expected, it's any rapist's best friend but also an explanation that anyone unfairly accused would hope to be taken seriously. Stars, groupies, bad boys, bad girls: we've been reading and hearing about their drinky, druggy, sexy, wild lives in the people press and on talk shows since stars were invented. Mick jagger, Noddy Holder and Carla Bruni are three who AFAIK have never been accused of anything non-consensual. In fact their known exes/conquests tend to speak highly of them. Everything points to both parties wanting the relationship and getting what they consented to out of the relationship, two people enjoying a tango.
So my question to Brand would be why these "consenting women" are so pissed off with him. Did he do what they felt they had consented to? From the statements it would appear not. Serial shagging hasn't caused Mick, Nod or Carla any problems, the service provided corresponded to hopes/expectations. The ladies in the Brand case clearly didn't get what they felt they'd consented to, therin lies his problem.
None of this is surprising...
Always thought RB was a bit of a poor man's Jimmy Saville.
Someone who was with Brand’s agency has some input.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/comedian-london-hughes-was-warned-not-to-sleep-with-russell-brand
The first two of those injustices are examples of where large institutions behaved negligently to victims and actively suppressed justice, and where the truth was revealed by meticulous TV journalism: “Death on the Rock” (This Week) and World in Action.
I don’t disagree with you - but whilst the illegal action and miscarriage of justice was eventually proven, initially a lot of the claims were rubbished and dismissed.
I’m probably of a similar opinion to Cougar. Given the treatment of victims of sexual assault and rape and the percentage of convictions secured, it’s not hard to see why victims are reluctant to talk to the police. The long history of patriarchy plays a massive part in maintaining a context where sexual abuse and rape is not treated as seriously as it might be.
If Russell Brand has committed these offences - he definitely needs to face the consequences of his actions.
Serial shagging hasn’t caused Mick, Nod or Carla any problems
The mental image of Noddy Holder mid-coitus was not one I was expecting to entertain today - so thanks for that, I suppose.
Edit: unless you meant Jagger, Holder and Bruni as part of the same encounter?
Reckon he screams "it's Christmas!" as he 'arrives'?
I'll never think of the phrase "oh look, it's snowing!" in the same way again.
Stand back folks, another demented right-wing, conspiracy-peddling nutjob warrior for truth and justice has come out to bat for Russell
Ladies and gentlemen, the rational and reasonable Katie Hopkins…
https://twitter.com/pandavasdream30/status/1703528921801920845?s=46&t=1lK7Dw1b6RqGJyvufO-trQ
Hatie Kopkins - incoming bananas missile. Take cover! Another deluded lunatic.