The Take (by Jon Miltimore)

The Take (by Jon Miltimore)

Share this post

The Take (by Jon Miltimore)
The Take (by Jon Miltimore)
Russell Brand’s YouTube Demonetization Shows How the West's Version of Social Credit Will Work
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More

Russell Brand’s YouTube Demonetization Shows How the West's Version of Social Credit Will Work

What few seem to realize is that demonetization is a feature of the emerging financial order, not a bug.

Jon Miltimore's avatar
Jon Miltimore
Sep 26, 2023
∙ Paid
6

Share this post

The Take (by Jon Miltimore)
The Take (by Jon Miltimore)
Russell Brand’s YouTube Demonetization Shows How the West's Version of Social Credit Will Work
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More
1
Share

YouTube initiated a ban on commentator Russell Brand on Tuesday that prohibits the celebrity from making money on its platform following accusations of sexual assault against the British comedian.

“If a creator’s off-platform behavior harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action to protect the community," YouTube said in a statement.

Mr. Brand, a former self-confessed sex addict, was accused of sexual and emotional abuse that allegedly took place several years ago by four women in an investigation by the Times of London, The Sunday Times, and Channel 4 "Dispatches."

The 48-year-old actor denied the charges in a video he shared with his 6.6 million YouTube followers over the weekend.

"These allegations pertain to the time when I was working in the mainstream, when I was in the newspapers all the time, when I was in the movies. And as I've written about extensively in my books, I was very, very promiscuous," Mr. Brand said. "Now, during that time of promiscuity, the relationships I had were absolutely always consensual."

A day after the allegations were reported, police in the UK said they had received a report of a sexual assault allegedly involving Mr. Brand in September 2003.

The Rise of Financial Deplatforming

The accusations against Mr. Brand are serious, and could eventually lead to criminal charges, both in the United States and the UK. But at this point, they're just that: accusations. This is one of the problems with #MeToo trials in the court of public opinion. The accused are presumed guilty and prematurely punished.

Consider another celebrity who famously found himself accused: Johnny Depp. In 2018, the "Pirates of the Caribbean" star was summarily dropped by Disney following accusations of domestic violence made by his ex-wife, Amber Heard. It didn’t matter that Mr. Depp said the allegations were untrue, or that he had served without incident for more than a decade as the lead actor in a franchise that had generated more than $3 billion for Disney.

Though nearly ruined, Mr. Depp would go on to win a defamation suit against Ms. Heard, receiving a multi-million-dollar settlement. (The actor appears to have taken Disney’s betrayal personally, evidenced by his decision to not return to the popular "Pirates of the Caribbean" franchise.)

YouTube and Disney, of course, have the right to associate with whomever they choose, but taking actions that destroy people’s livelihoods on mere accusations is a serious business, one that creates a dangerous incentive.

In her new book "You Will Own Nothing," the bestselling author Carol Roth writes of a new financial world that's emerging in which governments and corporations increasingly decide what behaviors are good and what behaviors are bad.

While the First Amendment prohibits the government from taking criminal actions against people for sharing “bad” opinions, the government can encourage corporations to take direct actions against citizens that inflict serious social and—more importantly—financial harm.

YouTube demonetization, which is relatively common, is just one example. Bank account deplatforming, a method that's increasingly common in the United States and Canada, is another.

“Financial deplatforming, or banking censorship, will be a common lever governments and companies reach for when it comes to censorship of political opinions,” said Annelise Butler in a 2022 Heritage Foundation article.

Ms. Butler said companies acquiescing to government requests to demonetize and censor users are “mirroring those of China’s social credit system.”

Interestingly Ms. Roth makes the same comparison in "You Will Own Nothing," adding that she would have laughed off such a thing 10 years ago.

“Given that we are so close to social credit, with the social acceptance of moral judgment outside the legal system and the technical means to collect and analyze information at scale, the Chinese system provides a frightening road map,” Ms. Roth wrote.

Keep reading with a 7-day free trial

Subscribe to The Take (by Jon Miltimore) to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 jjmilt
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share

Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More