News

Opinion: The Media vs Russell Brand

• 3rd Dec 2014

Channel 4 released a crass report earlier this week which showed comedian, film star and political hot-potato Russell Brand supporting tenants at the New Era Estate who fear their rent could be increased after a takeover by a US property company. This was immediately followed the next day by The Sun newspaper emblazoning their entire front page with a vitriolic attack on Brand. In the Channel 4 report, an obnoxious journalist gives some very loose background on the situation and grabs a glib sound bite from the man himself before immediately launching into an entirely predictable attack on Brand’s financial standing and the supposed hypocrisy of rich homeowners being the root cause of the problem.

“How much did you pay for your place?” he sneers from behind his microphone, to which Brand succinctly tells him that actually, like many people’s accommodation, it’s rented, whilst trying to move on with the conversation. “What kind of rent do you pay?” continues the reporter as he harries and derails Brand’s argument, before Russ snaps “I’m not interested in talking to you about my rent mate, I’m here to support a very important campaign and you as a member of the media have an important duty to represent these people”.

Objectivism and attempting to convey a balanced opinion is to be commended in a journalist – harassment of your interview subject when your point is invalid is petty and controversy-baiting. It’s here where my patience ends with the constant criticism of Brand; yes, he has made a lot of money from his career and enjoys a life of relative luxury (although I’m sure it’s not quite as velveteen as people seem to imagine). Does this mean he should be derided for wanting to help a group of single mothers from a council estate in inner city London? Would we rather he spent his time and money trying to “break the internet” by spraying champagne over his surgically enhanced arse and living at a thousand removals from reality? I for one would rather have a man like Russell Brand in my corner, a man who has clawed his way back from the brink of death after a heroin addiction to make something of his life, than a man who has been legged-up through the Old Etonian system of back slapping and buggery.

Thankfully one of the mothers at the protest chimes in towards the end of the piece to give the reporter a dose of honesty. We are all aware Russell Brand has a lot of money. So what? Why does that mean he can’t speak up on behalf of someone else? Politicians have a lot of money, yet we’re expected to trust them with the most complex machinations of societal makeup. Maybe it’s a sense of guilt or duty that’s fuelling his latest outburst, I don’t care – at least he seems compelled to do something about it and has an opinion and a voice that I can believe. He senses injustice and speaks out against it, whether he’s part of the cause or not. I’ve yet to see a politician hold up their hands and accept accountability in such a way. The irony of course is that Brand’s wealth has been created by the public and comes from his own innate likeability – people have voted with their wallets and forked out huge sums of money to see him on stage and screen because he’s an affable, intelligent and highly amusing guy. A career, it must be noted, that was skyrocketed to new levels of fame by the media and one station in particular…oh yes, Channel 4, the station at which he became an institution. You can’t help but feel that there’s a slight whiff of Frankenstein dismaying over the creation of his own monster about the whole affair.

In July of this year The Guardian reported on the Tory Summer Party, which saw 449 attendees at last year’s Thameside event on 24 June with a combined wealth in excess of £11bn. Elite diners sitting at tables costing up to £12,000 each to rub shoulders with David Cameron, Theresa May, Philip Hammond and Boris Johnson, as well as the secretaries of state for health, transport, culture and justice. And we’re expected to believe that these people have our best interests at heart? Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.

Brand’s real crime in the eyes of the largely white middle-class sect of traditional journalism is engaging with a disaffected youth vote that holds views diametrically opposed to their own – let’s not forget that half of the UK press is owned by a certain Rupert Murdoch. He has been labelled as dangerous and ridiculed at every opportunity because, in reality, he is succeeding in reinvigorating many people’s interest in politics – he has debunked the smoke and mirrors of the media, who by and large are as bad as the politicians for thinking that we, the proles, could never possibly understand the complex world of politics. I am not ashamed to say that I am approaching thirty and this is the first year I’ve really connected with politics in any way – the political landscape is alienating, it seems designed to confound ordinary people like me, to make us feel we can’t change anything, so why bother trying. With a lack of realistic candidates, is it any wonder that voting turnouts are at an all-time low and swathes of young voters are completely turned off and apathetic towards politics? Democracy should not be about voting for the lesser of three evils – we need someone we can believe in. I’m certainly not suggesting that person should be Brand, but doesn’t it speak volumes that I’m left speechless when asked to name a candidate I would vote for?

The whole situation can be summed up best by Monty Python’s still highly relevant “Burn the witch!” sketch from their Holy Grail masterpiece. The media see Brand with the trappings of wealth and fame and seek to paint him as one of the rich gang, looking down on the everyday man from his ivory tower and sneering as he spoons great piles of caviar into his guffawing gob. The reality is that this kind of deliberate character assassination is the exact opposite of what Brand appears, to me at least, to be – a conscientious, intelligent and reasonable man with a desire to do what little he can to help people less fortunate than himself now that he is in a position to do so. Whether his actions are motivated by his own ego or a real and palpable desire for change remains to be seen, and we could do with less of the silly outbursts teased out of him by reporters aware they can get an easy rise (he flounces off calling Channel 4’s man “a snide” in this particular piece), but there’s no denying that a candidate with Brand’s charisma, intellect, compassion and honesty is sorely missing from the usual drab line up of tawdry MPs. If only more people like Brand in a position of power and authority were inclined to use it for some sense of good.

– Jamie Otsa

That Monty Python sketch…

Media: We have found a witch. May we burn her?

Rational Person: How do you know she is a witch?

Media: She looks like one.

Rational Person: Bring her forward.

Russell Brand: I’m not a witch! I’m not a witch!

Rational Person: But you are dressed as one.

Russell Brand: They dressed me like this.

Media: No, we didn’t.

Russell Brand: And this isn’t my nose. It’s a false one.

Rational Person: Well?

Media: We did do the nose.

Rational Person: The nose?

Media: And the hat. But she is a witch!

Rational Person: Did you dress her up like this?

Media: No, no! Yes. A bit. She has got a wart.

Rational Person: What makes you think she’s a witch?

Media: She turned me into a newt!

Rational Person: A newt?

Media: I got better. Burn her anyway!