YouTube SHUT DOWN Russell Brand, DISABLES Monetization, BBC PULLS Shows As Brand Is WIPED From Med.. - Tim Pool

submitted by zyxzevn from (bitchute.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Did you have any on-topic response or you just want me to help you build those straw men

[–]stickdog 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

Do you also applaud the imprisonment of Assange?

Thanks for making the answer to this question clear.

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Lol imagine complaining that I didn't help you build an off-topic strawman to attack. You're like an infant. Little baby wants me to help him invent offtopic reasons to disregard the good and on topic points I raised.

Hey there little one.

Russel Brand is a rapist and nobody wants to work with him. It's not cancel culture. It's the predicable outcome of his horrible actions

[–]stickdog 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

So he has been convicted of rape?

No. He has not even been charged with rape. None of his accusers have so much as filed a single police report against him.

So on what basis is Youtube stealing his money?

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Wow you are just desperate to get a strawman up and running, aren't you!

Is it really so difficult to grapple with the actual facts of the matter.

Nobody is stealing, you precious baby snowflake.

I personally don't think yt ought to be FORCED by law to do business, with someone they don't want to, when the reason for them not wanting to, is not a protected characteristic.

Please put down your stupid infantile strawman tactics and look at the facts of this story

[–]stickdog 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

LOL. Then why is Youtube still "doing business" with Brand by airing Brand's content with ads while stealing Brand's agreed upon cut of this revenue?

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

How pathetic for you to keep, keep insisting that's it's stealing.

Hey how about this

How about Brand just stop uploading to YT. Then there won't be any accusation that they're stealing from him.

He could even delete his whole back catalogue. That would really show them!

[–]stickdog 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

LOL.

That's what you are reduced to in order to "defend" the FACT that YT is still streaming and generating revenue from every fucking video Brand has ever uploaded, but is just using a corporate media hit piece against him as its excuse to steal his share of the revenue?

Is there any sort of corporate malfeasance that you will not defend to the death?

If a bank "did not want to do business with him anymore," would you support that bank confiscating his deposits?

[–]Site_rly_sux 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

It's gonna come as a real surprise to you when you learn the economics of how YouTube works.

Hey mister ivory tower. Most YouTubers aren't getting paid. Amazing right? And nobody calls it shilling or malfeasance.

bank "did not want to do business with him anymore," would you support that bank confiscating his deposits?

In some regions, banks are regulated as utilities.

Let's be clear...

If British telecom says they're no longer connecting phone calls to his house then that's bad, because BT is a utility.

If Severn Trent water say they're no longer piping water to Russel Brand's house, then that's bad, because water is a utility.

If any company says, we don't want to do business with some religion, or ethnicity, then that's bad because those are protected characteristics.

But if....I dunno - Hotpoint washing machines say, we no longer want to sell to Brand because he's a creep and a rapist, then I have no problem with that. If they confiscate his washing machine from his kitchen then that's bad because he already paid for it.

Are we done with the straw men now?

Are there any more strawmen you'd like me to take a look at? You might as well get them all out upfront, so that we can return to discussing the matter at hand, which is, that brand is a creepy rapist and now nobody wants to work with him

[–]stickdog 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

It's gonna come as a real surprise to everyone when you manage to explain how withholding monetization based on a corporate media hit job is not stealing.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

YT is a monopoly and as such it could be forced to do business in a sane economy (like the EU). There is no stealing, but there is a legal case for depriving someone of income by abuse of power.