“British comedian and actor Russell Brand has denied any criminal wrongdoing as the Sunday Times newspaper reported four women had accused him of sexual assaults, including rape, during a seven-year period when he was at the height of his fame… The Times, which reported the alleged incidents had taken place between 2006 and 2013, said one woman had made an allegation of rape, while another said Brand assaulted her when she was 16 and still at school. Two of the accusers reported the incidents occurred in Los Angeles.” Reuters
“YouTube said on Tuesday it had blocked Russell Brand from making money from his online channel after the British actor and comedian was accused of a string of sexual assaults.” Reuters
The left is disturbed by the allegations, and laments that they were not shared earlier.
A libertarian's take
“As a private company, YouTube has the right, of course, to platform and deplatform anyone it wishes. It is not obligated to obey the First Amendment, extend due process to content creators, or enforce internally consistent rules. The company is free to do whatever it wants—and users are free to complain. And this seems like something worth complaining about…
“Brand has not been convicted of any crime. His accusers remain anonymous. Will any prominent figure accused of sexual misconduct anonymously face similar sanction, prior to any criminal action taking place? Due process, the presumption of innocence, the burden of the proof—these things are not legally required in a situation like this, but wholly jettisoning them is morally, practically, and philosophically unsound.”
Robby Soave, Reason