Blogs

A joke at Russell Brand’s expense

30 November 2013

3:16 PM

30 November 2013

3:16 PM

I see that Russell Brand has morphed into Mehdi Hassan. Mehdi, if you remember, excoriated The Daily Mail and then the paper published the cringe-worthy paean of praise Hassan had written to the paper’s editor in chief, Paul Dacre, when he was after a job. Brand, meanwhile, has bravely stuck it to The Sun newspaper and of course the most evil man in the entire history of mankind, Rupert Murdoch. The paper apparently ran a story that Brand had cheated on his girlfriend. Yes, yes, I know – big story. Anyway, in his usual tortured prose Brand kicked the hell out of The Sun. And then The Sun revealed that he had on four occasions been delighted to accept awards from The Sun, had regularly WRITTEN for The Sun, had publicised his work via The Sun, had made a television programme – Brand X – for The Sun’s parent company and had published two books with The Sun’s parent company. Yes, I think that counts as hilarious hypocrisy.

Subscribe to The Spectator today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Get more Spectator for less – just £12 for 12 issues.


Show comments
  • james

    But there are people who don’t like the monetary system, yet are forced to use it. Does that make them hypocrites? No
    Calling Brand a hypocrite is like calling someone who hates cancer a hypocrite for getting it; essentially a pointless criticism that doesn’t care about the subject at hand

  • Louise McCudden

    Hahaha

  • Swanky

    My curls are nicer than his.

  • The_greyhound

    Why is this dreary little creep being given the oxygen of publicity yet again? He may actually have even less to say than the flatulent boring lardarse that is Fry.

    Time to set a more realistic valuation on the light entertainment department.

    And ignore the bleeders.

  • JimmyLinton

    If Peter Sutcliffe were a long haired lesbian…

  • wycombewanderer

    Has anyone ever seen Russell Brand and Nigella Lawson in the same room?

  • In2minds

    And another log on the fire, let’s not forget that Russell Brand is pure
    BBC. Like Mehdi Hassan, a Question Time regular, only the BBC gives us these sort of people. And all paid for by coercion.

    • Daniel Maris

      Wrong again. He started out on MTV and then moved to E4/Channel 4. His own production company (yes – he’s a capitalist) operates out of Warner Bros.

  • CelestiaQuesta

    Brand reminds me of most long haired cocky narcissistic posers who glamour about while trying to be relevant.
    Cut his hair and shave his face and you’d have one piece of human excrement.
    My advice, keep the hair.

    • Wessex Man

      You don’t have to go to the trouble of Cutting his hair or shaving him, he already is and will always be!

  • the dude abides

    Russell Brand is spot on.

    Superb stuff. Anything that embarrasses Murdoch, and his posterior-lickers, is to be heartily welcomed.

    Keep up the great articles Russell.

    • Fergus Pickering

      I think it tkes someone more substantial than this painted child of dirt that stinks and stings to embarrass Rupert Murdoch. A good phrase that, don’t you think?

      • the dude abides

        a more apt term for those who post their bile against Brand, would be paid-corporate-whores.

        • La Fold

          Turn it in son, youre boring. the only paid corporate whore here is Brand, you know the fella who done adverts for Hewlett Packard and worked for Disney?

    • Curnonsky

      Yes, more Russell Brand please! His blatherings are doing more to embarrass the hypocritical luvvie left than anything Delingpole could possibly write, admirable though he is. Keep it up Russell, you’re on a roll!

    • La Fold

      Brand is happy to slurp on Murdochs member but wants everyone to think hes right on at the same time. pretty much this is how all hypcrotes should be measured from now on.

  • Daniel Maris

    I still think Russell’s got a way to go before he catches up with Mehdi. In fact Mehdi lapped him long ago with that gloriously hypocritical attack on inferior “cattle-like” kaffirs by the ethical advocate of equality for all.

  • FrankS2

    It’s probably the only funny thing Brand has ever done.

  • Wessex Man

    Ho ho ho ah ah ah, the first time I’ve found anything funny about this cretin!!!!!!

  • James Strong

    Russell Brand is a self-serving poseur prat.
    I heard a brief interview with him on Steve Wright In The Afternoon; he can talk quite eloquently in a normal voice, or he can put on an affected, faux-uneducated whine.
    Pillock.

  • Westerby

    With one hand, Brand gives the finger to Murdoch, while with the other hand he stuffs Murdoch’s cash into his pockets. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Brand has a new program in development with the Murdoch-owned FX cable channel in the U.S. So Brand continues to be on the Murdoch payroll… like a carnivore preaching the virtues of being a vegan. Think about it. If Brand thinks Murdoch is such a evil man, why does he continue to work for him? Do as I say, not as I do!

    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/fx-cancels-russell-brands-brand-564142

    • sarah_13

      Very true. He says “There is a certain duty that comes with being the annointed purveyor of truth” …. He is so full of rubbish. It’s ok of course when he terrorises an old man on live radio, no duty to other human beings then, no common decency and certainly no duty for him. Unfortunately this man has been elevated by better and more responsible people than he, without them appetites and misplaced anger would probably have killed him. He now thinks he can do without Rupert Murdoch’s cash directly, now that he’s so rich he presumably thinks he is untouchable having made it off the back of Murdoch he feels tainted and wants to bite the hand that fed him so well. Murdoch’s money and capitalism he apparently so despises appears to have allowed him the “freedom” to read Marx and Engels, something most of us did when we actually attended school. He’s an overgrown adolescent who acts like he’s just discovered Shakespeare.

  • victor67

    Ok Rod , Murdoch has your cheque in the post.

    • rodliddle

      He has my cheque in the post for the work I do for The Sun and for The Sunday Times, but not for this. It’s the hypocrisy I’m talking about, the easy hypocrisy.

      • victor67

        I am honoured by the personal reply .
        I shall share with you a story that may give you an insight into the character of your boss, some of your journalist colleagues and the type of organization that pays for your what I imagine comfortable lifestyle.
        Several years ago a close friend suffered a tragedy when a family member was murdered. When she refused to speak to the NOW, The Sun and The Mail. The Sun printed lies about the circumstances of the murder that made it more grotesque and grizzly. As you can imagine this compounded her torment and suffering.
        Whatever Brands faults, his article in the Guardian is on the money about the Dirty Digger and the malignant nature of his red top newspapers.
        So there you go Rod, hopefully there be no cognitive dissonance going on for you now.

        • rodliddle

          Ok Victor, if that’s what he thinks, fine. Don’t work for them then. That’s my gripe; Russell wants his cake, wants to eat it, regurgitate it up and then eat it again.

          • victor67

            Yeh but classic Murdoch tactic to shoot the messenger to deflect from the substance of the message. You are well schooled Rod.

            • Ridcully

              Not so much shooting the messenger as pointing out that the messenger has more faces than the Town Hall clock.

            • rodliddle

              What? Yeah ok, Vic, I’m a craven lackey instructed to do my master’s bidding. Christ, you lot are simplistic.

              • victor67

                So would you be allowed to run the “alleged” story about Tony’s liaisons with young Wendy? If it wasn’t about the Boss the Sun would be drooling

                • Fergus Pickering

                  Who are Tony and Wendy? Tell us, dear Victor. Spread te dirt. I love knowing about things like that.

                • victor67

                  Blair and Mrs M but I am sure you new.

                • Fergus Pickering

                  I did not though I learned it from today’s Telegraph. It’s not very interesting since they didn’t fuck.

                • victor67

                  So when has the truth bothered the Sun.

                • La Fold

                  That would be the same Sun that brand is more than happy to work for?

            • Fergus Pickering

              What message dies Brand bring us, pray? He cannot talk about anything except insofar as it reflects himself. He is sick of self-love. A fine phrase, but not my own.

        • La Fold

          That would that be the same fella Brands worked for you dry lunch?

  • justejudexultionis

    Given the extent of Murdoch control over the British media, I would have thought it would be nigh on impossible for a journalist to avoid working for a Murdoch-owned media outlet at some point in his/her career. So where is Brand’s ‘hypocrisy’?

    • binnsmeister

      Where’s his “journalism” ? I’ve yet to see any “journalism” from him.
      He’s just like any other luvvie … fine with the media, any media, when the media promotes him, right up until it prints something about him he doesn’t want promoting.

    • Westerby

      The hypocrisy is clear as day. Brand continued to write for Sun, continued to have his book serialized in the paper, continued to be on Murdoch’s payroll with his “Brand X” show on the FX station, AFTER the phone hacking revelations came out. Brand wrote for the Sun as recently as June of this year, and presumably he was aware of what a putrid rag it was then. Why did he not object to the hacking in June of this year? Why did he not speak out?
      Brand currently has another programme in development in U.S. to be broadcast on the Murdoch-owned FX channel, so he is STILL on the Murdoch payroll. With one hand he shows the finger to Murdoch, while the hand stuffs Murdoch’s filthy cash into his pockets. If you don’t see that’s hypocrisy, then you don’t know what the word even means.

    • flaxdoctor

      Murdoch in control? Dream on – maybe 10% – the BBC have the the rest of the show to themselves – a massive state broadcasting and publishing near-monopoly – http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/files/2013/11/SS3.png

    • Fergus Pickering

      At some point, old son. At some point? He kissed the man’s bottom for a long time.

  • merryfield

    So Liddle is saying anybody who has ever been paid by a Murdoch company is a hypocrite if they then criticise Murdoch over hacking? What barmy logic. I would have thought the opposite were true. The hypocrisy lies in the ongoing silence of those commentators on, or hoping to be on, the Murdoch payroll. Russell Brand is bang on target and watching the likes of Liddle feebly wriggling on Brand’s skewer is nothing short of a delight.

    • rodliddle

      He’s not criticising Murdoch simply over hacking. He’s criticising Murdoch, and The Sun, on every available front. But was still happy to entrust virtually his entire career – tv, books, publicity – to the man’s companies. If that doesn’t strike you as a tad hypocritical then I assume your field must be merry as a consequence of Class A drugs.

      • merryfield

        You’ve got this all backwards. The hypocrisy around the exposure of the gross venality of Murdoch and his cronies lies in the silence of those employees who would ordinarily be required to comment on it. Instead there is much pulling of punches or avoiding the subject altogether out of pure self-interest. It is inverted morality to suggest that those who speak up are the hypocrites. It is precisely because Brand has something to lose in taking on Murdoch that his piece has weight. He’s the only comedian in the country who dares take him on. He’s making the rest of you look weak.

        • rodliddle

          Yup, it was the Class A drugs after all.

          • merryfield

            What are you rambling on about Mr Liddle? Wildly accusing people who disagree with you of being on class A drugs? Surely – I mean surely – you can do better than that. In a way I feel sorry for you. A good mind like yours languishing in a trap of its own making – it’s a waste and an unseemly spectacle.

            • La Fold

              Nope, Brand is a self confessed smackhead. Science fact.

        • sarah_13

          “Gross venality” , you mean like terrorising an old man live on radio for a laugh? He’s a narcissistic, insatiable, attention seeking, self righteous hypocrite. He’s exposing nothing, what he’s doing is abusing the position that other better people than he enabled him to achieve. So now he apparently abstains from drugs etc, something most of us have done all our lives, as the really intelligent observe without acting out the pointlessness of habituating an activity to the point of becoming addicted. Many of us from just as underprivileged families as mr brand have not felt the need to blame “toffs”, Cameron, Murdoch or anyone else for our own foolish mistakes. Now having-achieved fame, fortune and noteriety off the work and battles fought by the likes of Murdoch and other capitalists which enabled him to work he is “comfortable” enough to think he can do without it. He is a hypocrite with too much time and money on his hands.

        • Fergus Pickering

          Oh, he’s a comedian. I wondered what he was.

        • La Fold

          Absolute codswallop as well you know. This was the same tired argument that bugle fiend Coogan tried a while back.
          The mans a hypocrite and you defend him? speaks volumes.

    • Fergus Pickering

      No that is not what Rod Liddle said. Brand is a self-regarding fool. I long to see that back of him. His wit is about as sharp as Liberace’s

      • CymruChris

        Surely a bit unfair on Liberace?

Close