General
17 Sep 23
@divegeester saidFor many years he has struck me as a complete and utter creep who isn't particularly funny. Now, I don't know if he is guilty of the terrible things he is accused of. He deserves his day in court, of course, if there ever is one, and if he is able to clear his name, so be it. Innocent until proven guilty etcetera. But, supposing he did do what he is accused of doing, how ghastly it must have been for his victims to see him permanently on their TV screens all these years being a complete and utter creep who isn't particularly funny.
I’m not sure I agree with some of the cancel culture going on with Brand; nothing has yet been proven.
20 Sep 23
@fmf saidI can’t stand the man; creepy, narcissistic, manipulative, opportunistic misogynist covering his licentious past with his support of women’s help groups. And what he and Ross did to Andrew Sachs in 2008 was unforgivable.
For many years he has struck me as a complete and utter creep who isn't particularly funny. Now, I don't know if he is guilty of the terrible things he is accused of. He deserves his day in court, of course, if there ever is one, and if he is able to clear his name, so be it. Innocent until proven guilty etcetera. But, supposing he did do what he is accused of doing, how ghastly ...[text shortened]... on their TV screens all these years being a complete and utter creep who isn't particularly funny.
But aside from all that this prejudiced cancel culture approach to public witch-hunts is not the right way for society to react.
20 Sep 23
@divegeester saidI am not involved in any "prejudiced cancel culture" or "witch-hunt"; in fact, I never have been ~ although I was part of couple of boycotts and protests when I was younger.
I can’t stand the man; creepy, narcissistic, manipulative, opportunistic misogynist covering his licentious past with his support of women’s help groups. And what he and Ross did to Andrew Sachs in 2008 was unforgivable.
But aside from all that this approach to public witch-hunts is not the right way for society to react.
If he was going to do a show at, say, the Palace Theatre in Watford and the ticket holders were going to stay away [or the ticket sales had lumped] and the management of the venue didn't want the bad publicity, is that "cancel culture"?
20 Sep 23
@fmf saidIts never the ticket holders staying away or sales slumping.
I am not involved in any "prejudiced cancel culture" or "witch-hunt"; in fact, I never have been ~ although I was part of couple of boycotts and protests when I was younger.
If he was going to do a show at, say, the Palace Theatre in Watford and the ticket holders were going to stay away [or the ticket sales had lumped] and the management of the venue didn't want the bad publicity, is that "cancel culture"?
20 Sep 23
1 edit
@the-gravedigger saidMoney is becoming an issue around the world, not one country has the problem with not enough money, everyone is in the same boat. We have more homeless than I've ever seen in my life time. I am no spring chick either. 🙂
Its never the ticket holders staying away or sales slumping.
-VR
@fmf saidTo be clear I am not a fan of Brand, in fact I have always disliked the man intensely and my ‘personal opinion’ on the accusations against him is that they contain a level credibility.
I am not involved in any "prejudiced cancel culture" or "witch-hunt"; in fact, I never have been ~ although I was part of couple of boycotts and protests when I was younger.
If he was going to do a show at, say, the Palace Theatre in Watford and the ticket holders were going to stay away [or the ticket sales had lumped] and the management of the venue didn't want the bad publicity, is that "cancel culture"?
However, as Drewnogal said (before editing her post) a person is innocent until proven guilty. So to answer your question; if I had a ticket to his show I wouldn’t personally go (I wouldn’t have had one anyway), but I don’t think it’s right for the theatres to “cancel” commercial agreements they have with with him based on as yet unproven accusations. Nor do I think it right for youtube to withhold earnings from him by cancelling adverts on his channel. Let the public decide for themselves wether or not they wish to attend his shows or watch his channel.
It’s not easy for businesses to navigate this but I feel it is these establishments duty of process to abide by what is proven, not by what is alleged.
@divegeester saidWell said.
To be clear I am not a fan of Brand, in fact I have always disliked the man intensely and my ‘personal opinion’ on the accusations against him is that they contain a level credibility.
However, as Drewnogal said (before editing her post) a person is innocent until proven guilty. So to answer your question; if I had a ticket to his show I wouldn’t personally go (I woul ...[text shortened]... feel it is these establishments duty of process to abide by what is proven, not by what is alleged.
20 Sep 23
@very-rusty saidHe disappeared from public view following false abuse claims in 2014.
There is a Cliff?
-VR
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11130501/Sir-Cliff-Richard-never-false-abuse-claims-feelings-hate-accuser.html