Brand damage

A comedian runs out of laughs

A four-year investigation into accusations of rape and sexual abuse crashed into Russell Brand and his growing conspiratorial media empire less than a week ago. The joint effort between three media organizations included over 100 interviews and covered a seven-year period of the actor’s life. (While the article hits hard, the special report really needs to be seen.)

Last Friday, Brand published a three-minute frenetic video across his social media channels—and has been silent since. Preempting the inevitable fallout, the comedian trotted out the tired (but sadly effective) method of playing the victim. For many of his followers, it worked.

Brand was given eight days to reply to the reporting, though only during his hectic day-before video does he sound the trumpet to his legion. Two days prior, however, he posted a video paraphrasing Luke 23:34:

Then Jesus said, 'Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.' And they cast lots to divide his clothing.

Brand throws in Joseph Campbell and Buddha because, sure, why not, something about “most” people remaining unconscious “most” of the time. When people make such a declaration, they’re usually implying they see through the veil of illusions and remain awake—always a red flag from charismatic influencers. Taken contextually, however, this video seems to preempt the victims of his alleged abuse: they know not what they do.

An incredibly bold move. We don’t know if Brand was specifically referring to the women, most of whom have remained anonymous out of fear, but we do know at this point he had five days to chew on the fact that this investigation was going public.

While I don’t buy into the idea that his move to America and rebrand as a Kundalini yogi and, eventually, far-right provocateur was planned for just this moment—Brand is no chess grandmaster foreseeing the span of a dozen years—what’s apparent in his increasingly conspiratorial videos is that he knows how to cultivate and speak to his fanbase.

A fanbase that immediately rejected the notion that they’ve been conned by lashing out against them—who? the media? the women? the deep state? anyone they don’t agree with?—without even watching the documentary or reading the investigation.

This is a complex and unfolding story, and there’s certainly more to come. I want to briefly touch upon three aspects of note.

Secure the men

First, the technique. Brand is a masterful Gish galloper. Few charismatics can claim such a frantic curse of gab. And so a week after being informed about the investigation, he bombs a last-minute Hail Mary to his fans, as if he only found out himself. We know he was aware of the speeding train. His decision to play into social media’s speed as a defense speaks volumes about his understanding of how these networks operate.

Brand’s video had the intended effect. A swarm of men rushed in to divert attention and concoct conspiracies before any of them could even read or watch the reporting. Neither matters: these men have cultivated a severe distrust of journalism, in themselves and their followers. Reporters are their pipeline to paranoia, and they incessantly play victim.

Cases in point:

---

None of those responses have anything to do with the content of the reporting or the claims of the women. Irrelevant, given who’s replying. The notion of women as pawns in a conspiratorial game by them is par for the course for men with their own trail of deceit and misogyny.

These are expectable replies from predictable men. Men who praise high testosterone and denounce soy boys. Men concerned about a collapsing “Western civilization” while fondling themselves over the Roman Empire. Men who think women have a place, exist to serve men, and are only afforded the opportunities they—usually confirmed by whatever god they pretend to honor—give them. Men incapable of understanding the reason it took these women years to come forward is because they’re scared of them.

Men who can’t possibly wrap their heads around why women would choose to remain anonymous, because they’ve never had to fear the terror of men just like them, these disgruntled boys in adult bodies.

Parasocial paranoia

Women are defending Brand as well. Over in wellness land, contrarian inspirational speaker, Danielle LaPorte, decided her commentary was necessary, posting this on Brand’s video.

Pretty rich to imagine alleviating the emotional and psychic pain of a man who, by his own account, was far less than empathic to women for years. But on brand for an influencer who told “rage babes” to “just get over it.” Interesting to note she’s turned off comments on her most recent posts, perhaps in fear of those rage babes who, I don’t know, might have actually watched the documentary.

Brand’s stardom in large part relies on the parasocial nature of social media. By playing the relatable yet aloof younger brother archetype on television for so long, he cultivated a fanbase that both wanted to be him and wanted to be with him. (A former co-worker, Helen Berger, admits that many women openly slept with him over the years she worked with him.) Brand also relied on a sleight of hand: openly admitting his promiscuity gave him cover if he were to, as the allegations go, force women to have sex with him. 

You know, boys just being boys.

This trifecta of actresses provides a case study in parasocial and paranoid defense responses:

For Olga Kurylenko, Russell is “close to the truth” and needs to “be out of the game.” What truth? What game? Brand has cultivated a reactionary audience that immediately “questions” anything uttered by an unapproved power structure. Brand isn’t really being accused of sexual assault and rape—themes that have persisted for decades. He’s being “cancelled.”

Danniella Westbrook uses an anecdote—I like you and you’re nice to me—as a character assessment, which is exactly what charlatans and predators exploit in those open to seduction. The documentary clips a comedy sketch with Brand admitting to being really good at courtship before revealing his true hollow-eyed identity. Some courtships remains perpetually suspended, even from afar, if it suits the perpetrator.

Taryn Manning offers the most paranoid reply: “they” are after me too. Who? Doesn't matter. Invent a powerful enemy and embrace your inner victim. She’s apparently targeted for her faith—a lot to unpack there, contextually. The most persecuting faith in our nation’s history cosplays as the persecuted. It does fit well with the cancellation ruse in American society.

Again: it’s highly unlikely any of these commenters have watched the documentary, especially since many were posted before it aired. Which brings us to the final aspect worth considering.

Journalism isn't court

The final jigsaw piece involves the most circulated response: the courts are the jury here. Don’t rush to convict a potentially innocent man.

I completely agree. And if a court case was imminent—and it might be—due process is necessary. But that’s not what this reporting concerns. Those rushing to that defense are missing the broader context.

Investigative journalism is a painstakingly slow and deeply introspective process. Unfortunately, it’s ill-suited for the speed at which social media churns. Thanks to decades of comment sections and the ability to quickly spin up content from your phone, people have come to believe their hot takes are journalism. They’re not, but some influencers are certainly fooled by the convenience of our communications networks. And that’s why these commenters are confusing this extensive reporting with their hunches, and why they’re conflating women sharing traumatic allegations with court cases. They either don’t understand the separation between the institution of journalism and the justice system, or they don’t care.

This investigation is the result of years of corroborated reporting. Yet this is being released to a public that barely trusts the media. Brand’s audience skews right and libertarian, and we can see where that lands the work of journalists. 

MeToo was an important and essential moment in our nation’s history. And those boys in adult bodies didn’t like being held to account. The backlash has been the relentless saturation of manosphere influencers armed with podcast mics demanding their voices be heard—as if they weren’t already the loudest. So what you get is a chorus of bass-heavy mouth holes yelling evolutionary biology something something we’re just apes this is our birthright, and women saying, hey, we’re here, too, and some things need to change, and retribution is called for. And men ape and howl and something something science this is just how it is.

Amazing how quickly men who champion growth mindsets and change to market nootropics and life coaching so quickly revert to “biology” when it suits their unwillingness to actually grow and change.

Yes, due process is important. But as the documentary makes clear, Brand has already said all the damning words. If that many people that close to you provide the text messages, confirm the sources, and merely repeat your own words back to you, there’s not much of a discussion about who you are. To continue to treat this man as a truth teller is to remain blinded to what he’s already made apparent.

Brand has spent decades being the loudest voice in the room. Maybe we need to listen to those who didn’t know how to break through that noise, but who now have a voice.

They too have stories to tell. And we can use new stories right now.