Mailwatch(ed) Forum

If there's a Holmes he resembles, it's Eammon.

Incredible. Ranting internet twat is the real journalist, apparently.

Clowns.

I can certainly see a similarity between Piers Corbyn and Brand, but I doubt that's the one they mean.

Never heard of this newshound heavyweight who doesn't know what a "sting" is.

Perhaps someone told her the Police are looking into it.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 1:06 pm If there's a Holmes he resembles, it's Eammon.

Or, for our American readers, Elizabeth.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun Sep 17, 2023 1:34 pm Incredible. Ranting internet twat is the real journalist, apparently.

Because it's just a big team fight with hockey-sticks for some.

See my comments on the invisible barrier in the media (Owen Jones thread). The velvet rope, if you like. There's an awful lot of "how dare a mere reporter attack a name?" about some reactions.

Looks like they’re really moving in for the kill on this . . .

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/cultur ... 1694952854



Listen: Russell Brand offers ‘naked assistant’ to meet Jimmy Savile in resurfaced audio

Oh look who's shown up.

On balance, I think "investigations take a long time" is the more convincing explanation than the conspiracist one.

Note how Young chucks in the date of the alleged offence, complete red herring. Being further in the past would make it harder, wouldn't it?

It's on things like this that you notice that absolute connection between blue tick and far-right conspiracy theorists. Has anyone worked out why they go for the tick?

Veneer of authority, just like knighthoods and military titles.

Brand incorporated some funny routines in his stand up around bullshit stories in the tabloids. That’s not particularly hard or original as we know on this site, the tabloids write the comedy for us. Nevertheless they were worthy targets to call out and expose to a younger audience not media savvy. But then become an online conspiracist in your mid 30s beloved of cranks who work for these publications is very odd.
Have you seen the Corbynista take? The MSM lied about Jeremy in a Panorama documentary so this Brand story is probably lies.
https://x.com/jackiew80333500/status/17 ... Dkr8MiQKBg

satnav wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2023 2:41 pm Many of supporters are trying to claim that he is being targeted because of his views on vaccines, the only problem with this particular claim is that the investigation started over 3 years ago where as the first vaccine wasn't administered until December 2020. His supporters are clearly not very at good at Maths.

All part of the plan. [/wibble]

Youngian wrote: ↑Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:46 am Brand incorporated some funny routines in his stand up

I said in the OP that I have never found Brand even remotely funny. His success as a comedian is therefore inexplicable to me. His reinvention as a political commentator/controversialist is equally baffling to me. Remember when he admitted that he had never voted in his life, and advocated abstention from voting as some sort of viable approach to the electoral process?

He was and is a tedious, attention-seeking , vacuous twat. And, it would seem, a nasty, dangerous, abusive one at that.

And another one enabled by the grubbier parts of the media...

His schtick initially was in many ways not that different from many a music journalist or presenter on The Word - dress up lowbrow shit in flowery language, and appeal to the 6th formers out there. "Hey everyone, wouldn't it be great if we could just rip off our clothes and have sex? Meanwhile I'll name-drop a few cool bands." was already being done (and sent up) by Rob Newman 10 years earlier. Brand just rehashed it with a bit of 'edgy' intensity (as opposed to Newman's more angsty sophomore style) and post-millennial inclusivity ("Hey, it's groovy if you like willies touching willies, just don't knock your willy against mine, right?"). I recall on either HIGNFY or Buzzcocks he did the incredibly edgy ((c) Freddie Starr on Celebrity Squares) stunt of getting up from behind his desk to have a wander around.

In many ways rather fitting for Channel 4 - no matter how you dress it up and invite psychiatrists onto Naked Attraction or Embarrassing Bodies, we know, you know, and everyone knows that it's just an excuse to smuggle in a bit of tit and bum.

It's a tough call for the Mail as Brand is in receipt a Mail lifetime of hate sentence but most of the cuntosphere seem to be that he's innocent.