this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
396 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

59106 readers
4410 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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::YouTube has blocked Russell Brand from making money off its platform and the BBC pulled some of his shows from its online streaming service in the wake of rape and sexual assault allegations against the comedian-turned-influencer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] garretble@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google is not the law, and they can do whatever they want with their company.

They don’t have to continue to pay him if they don’t want to — innocent, guilty, whichever. Just like they don’t have to continue to host nazi garbage or MAGA garbage if they don’t want to.

[–] pokemaster787@ani.social 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Google is not the law, and they can do whatever they want with their company.

Sure, but imagine your employer just fired you because of accusations before it ever reached trial. Illegal? No. Ruining someone's livelihood even though they're innocent legally speaking? Yes.

Not defending this person, I genuinely do not even know who they are. But "private company can do whatever they want, your rights are only something the government has to care about" is a pretty concerning position to take. Not to mention they didn't seem to take down or stop running ads on the channel, just stopped giving him the money. They're profiting off of his content without paying him and using an unverified (but very possibly accurate) accusation as an excuse. That should be illegal.

[–] GeneralVincent@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would hope my job would fire me if there were a dozen complaints about me ranging from mental abuse to rape over the span of over a decade.

I agree with you about Google just pocketing any money made off him though, that's messed up

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

The influx of libertarian dead minded commenters here is exhausting. Too concerned with zero tolerance rules to even consider the details or understand the difference. I thought Reddit was bad.

[–] Blizzard@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago

I genuinely do not even know who they are

Don't kkow too much about him but I liked him in this video.

[–] GiantRobotTRex@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago

When YouTube disables monetization they stop running any ads on the channel. Other articles like this one are clearer on that matter.

[–] GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This only works because Youtube has the loosest form of contracts with its creators. Your regular employers can't fire you because of allegations or hearsay (modulo local labor laws).

[–] mx_smith@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This puts Russel Brand in a position to sue for libel and slander as the court of public opinion has already declared him guilty. What happens if he is found innocent at his court case. What if they did this to Johnny Depp?

[–] phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Nothing. These people aren’t entitled to companies wanting to work with them. This isn’t the same thing as being a W-2 worker somewhere.

[–] Pagliacci@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

"Not guilty" is distinct from "innocent", and such a verdict, if a trial ever comes of this, would not impact libel or slander. Being unable to prove your accusations in court to the standard required is not a determination that the accusations were false, only that doubt remained.