Is It Right to De-monetize Russell Brand After Allegations?

And why is the UK government interfering?

YouTube pulled the plug on Russell Brand being monetised via its platform and now other social media sites are being pressured to do the same. But is it right to even do this?

Let’s first preface this whole discussion with a brief background. Russell Brand has been accused by four women of rape and sexual assault, harassment and more in the height of his fame, between 2006 and 2013. It looks as if so far (at the time of writing) only one person has gone to the police about it, and the police haven’t yet charged him with a crime. I have no doubt the claims are genuine, and I expect he should go through the justice process and face the consequences the same as any other person would. I’m not here to give my opinion on any of that.

There’s something else at play here that is not sitting well with me. It’s two-fold:

• YouTube has de-monetised Russell Brand’s account.
• Social media sites are being asked by a UK government representative to de-monetise him further.

There’s a lot to unpack here.

The Power of Private Companies

YouTube, owned by Google, is a private company with its own ideas on what is reasonable behaviour. And it can choose to turn off someone’s income from its platform whenever they like, for whatever reason, really. This is exactly why many YouTubers have multiple channels with multiple Google accounts for payouts. No-one likes the tap getting turned off, especially when you’re running a channel specifically to make money.

It’s also not as if the money being withheld from Brand is being held in escrow or anything. Google is literally just keeping the money from those adverts for itself while this high-profile case goes on.

However, it’s strange that Google would decide to de-monetise Russel Brand’s account merely after accusations were made against him. Would it not be more pertinent to wait until the police charged him?

And what if this is the new normal for YouTube?

Will they do this to any high profile account that’s accused of anything in future? What about everyday people accused of crimes? How are they planning on policing this? Do people get to have their earnings back when they’re cleared of wrongdoing?

And as far as I can tell, this is the first high profile person YouTube has demonetised for something they did outside of YouTube.

So why start doing this? And why start with Brand?

The Rights of the Accused

Generally speaking, the justice systems of the world hold with the phrase “Innocent until proven guilty”, meaning before those of us who literally have no idea what the facts are run out with pitchforks, we should allow the police and courts to do their jobs.

That doesn’t mean we condone the behaviour they were accused of, or that we need to hold that person in high esteem ever again. It simply means we need to back off and trust the process for a while.

In similar situations to Brand, police officers have found themselves suspended from work with pay. Tory politicians have been allowed to continue their work unimpeded. Most of the general public continue to work freely until charged.

And although this can at times feel dangerous and awful, this is the process as it stands at the moment.

I’m sure the journalists involved in Brand’s story have done a great job uncovering these allegations, but the fact is they are merely the trigger for the justice process, not the final say.

This is how society functions.

Government Interference

This is where the story takes a radical turn for the worse.

A UK politician has taken it upon herself to implore at least four other social media sites to demonetise Russell Brand.

Letters from Caroline Dinenage have surfaced, asking Rumble, X, TikTok, and Instagram (owned by Meta) to demonetise Russell Brand.

While it’s worth noting that she may be a lone actor, she does still represent the UK government and its people. It’s pretty serious to start asking private companies to take punitive action against someone before they have even been charged of a crime.

I personally think it’s important for MPs to uphold the law and to trust their own country’s justice system to do that for the crimes of others, not to get involved and pre-emptively demand someone goes punished.

And it’s galling that she is asking this of private companies, who have no reason to succumb to the wishes of any particular individuals or foreign governments, let alone a random MP on the other side of the planet.

It looks like Dinenage has overstepped somewhat, and is encroaching on human rights issues, internet governance dilemmas and more. She asked these companies to tell her if he is able to monetise a video he made in his defence or other videos. Why would these companies disclose this to her when it gets the company in trouble for data privacy violations?

And specifically citing YouTube’s demonetisation, Dinenage asks for Rumble to demonetise him also. YouTube has opened a big can of worms here, and it’s leading to expectations of censorship powers.

A private company can censor anyone they wish on their own platform, but when governments request censorship it would best be served with some valid non-political reasoning.

Else where would we be, hey?

The Future of Social Media Monetisation & Censorship

Will anyone trust YouTube and Google in the future?

I think YouTube has set a dangerous precedent.

Brand is famous and no doubt has other funds, but for regular YouTubers who work hard for their monetisation status and resultant income, being demonetised without recourse when accused could be devastating, and possibly hinder them from being able to fund their own defence.

And how many other government representatives are going to join this bandwagon, asking for the demonetisation and censorship of anyone on their radar?

Tread Carefully

Do we want government agents to have that sort of power? Or do we want to pursue justice as best as we can, allowing the media circus to go on without adding government censorship to condone cancel culture and internet lynch mobbing.

We’ve seen a lot of stars fall from grace for many reasons, and Brand won’t be the last.

At the very least, we should hold our own governments to account for their behaviour.

Follow Ange for ideas on marketing, solopreneurship and productivity: Substack | Instagram | Twitter