Russell Brand opens debate but the left come knocking

And now... the inevitable takedown of Russell Brand just as he says something sensible on the occasion of his guest editorship of the New Statesman magazine. Yes, we've all been saying the system sucks and we need a change for the betterment of the majority but, as Rusty Rockets acknowledges in his self-deprecating way (because this man is not stupid), his celebrity means that they gave his views an airing for once. And not just a thirty-second soundbite but a whole TEN MINUTES! It makes a change from the usual shrink-the-state nobodies propelled into the public eye, as usually happens on the now-execrable Newsnight.

And lo, it was wonderful to behold. It cheered us up, kickstarted the debate and has the Right getting their silk knickers in a twist. What's not to like?

Can we please focus on what Russell is saying and not indulge in the irrelevant twaddle about what his hair's doing and whether he wears purple velvet tails (or has a long scaly red one. Ooh-er!). Must we always share the attention span of goldfish? This is all a massive diversion from the issues he raised and plunges the debate into Miley-Cyrus-circus territory (and this is the very first time in the current round of star-gazing that I've mentioned the idiot who makes the slitty-eyed gesture, or "sub-species" Morrissey, who've both been tsunamied at us by the broadsheets as much as by the tabloids these past weeks. Let's thank Russell for knocking them off the top media perch.).

Is he sexist? Yes. Is he a thoroughly nice chap who refused to take his pop-star missus to the cleaners when they divorced? Double yes. Get out of your nappies and start enaging with the issues. He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy who the Establishment would like to see strung up with his own flowing locks, so let's not look the gift-horse in the mouth. Being a dick in one area of his life does not negate what he's said on this occasion.

For me, I'm more worried that the Staggers' Last Supper photo is so unbelievably white (although one of the writers and a couple of the short opinions reflect the ethnic make-up of Great Britain and the world), but we can deal with the left's whitewashing of the movement another time (or read what some of us have already observed and been ignored).

For now, Russell's galvanised the movement, joined the dots and naturalised the progressive discourse. That's a considerable achievement. Well done.

Medialens on media sneering about Brand.

Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross: a modern lynching

Martin Rowson gets it right

Okay, I hate myself. I didn't want to but they made me do it. London Mayor Boris Johnson accused the Chinese of being incapable of original thought and here I am proving his halfwit point by blogging on the sodding Brand 'n' Ross stormette just like every other mofo and his dog.

But I am so furious. FURIOUS, I tells ya. Just when everyone was waking up, smelling the coffee, swallowing the red pill and dusting down the tumbrils for the long-awaited fate of the greedy overpaid city hotshots who've sucked all the money out of our economy, their mates at the Daily Mail swing it around and chuck two celebrities into the lions' den to draw all the flak that should have been zeroing in on the real fat cats.

Two silly little middle-aged boys go bullying the sainted Andrew Sachs on the radio over the sex-life of his granddaughter (yes, it was wrong, stupid and sexist and deserved a dressing-down — hey, make them wear polyester for a year, that'll learn 'em) and suddenly it's like Satan walked in and ate all the babies. Even poor old Sachs seems embarrassed by the whole pantomime and has called for calm.

With £18 million of publicly funded BBC dosh, Jonathan Ross is hugely overpaid. But I'd rather see someone who brings a modicum of pleasure to people's lives getting lots of lolly than the Masters of the Universe who merely shove money around and asset-strip rather than actually producing anything.

Bankers are still getting their bonuses despite receiving huge state hand-outs following years of hedge-funded short-selling avarice, but a couple of celebrities are being thrown to a torch-bearing, pitchfork-wielding mob, taking the heat off the proper thieving swine. And the BBC is made to kow-tow yet again for completely the wrong reasons! Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?

Sense of proportion, much?

STOP PRESS: For anyone puzzled by events and wondering wtf Ross and Brand actually did, there's a thorough precis at New Internationalist.
... So when Gordon Brown insists, that the illegal invasion of Iraq, which has cost tens of thousands of lives and is paid for by the British taxpayer, is to ensure that ‘the new Iraqi democracy is properly safeguarded’ – where are the 30,000 complaints to the BBC when that that particular obscenity is broadcast on Newsnight? ...

Russell Brand responds to the Daily Mail

Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand's original offending phone message to Andrew Sachs

Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross: a modern lynching

Martin Rowson gets it right

Okay, I hate myself. I didn't want to but they made me do it. London Mayor Boris Johnson accused the Chinese of being incapable of original thought and here I am proving his halfwit point by blogging on the sodding Brand 'n' Ross stormette just like every other mofo and his dog.

But I am so furious. FURIOUS, I tells ya. Just when everyone was waking up, smelling the coffee, swallowing the red pill and dusting down the tumbrils for the long-awaited fate of the greedy overpaid city hotshots who've sucked all the money out of our economy, their mates at the Daily Mail swing it around and chuck two celebrities into the lions' den to draw all the flak that should have been zeroing in on the real fat cats.

Two silly little middle-aged boys go bullying the sainted Andrew Sachs on the radio over the sex-life of his granddaughter (yes, it was wrong, stupid and sexist and deserved a dressing-down — hey, make them wear polyester for a year, that'll learn 'em) and suddenly it's like Satan walked in and ate all the babies. Even poor old Sachs seems embarrassed by the whole pantomime and has called for calm.

With £18 million of publicly funded BBC dosh, Jonathan Ross is hugely overpaid. But I'd rather see someone who brings a modicum of pleasure to people's lives getting lots of lolly than the Masters of the Universe who merely shove money around and asset-strip rather than actually producing anything.

Bankers are still getting their bonuses despite receiving huge state hand-outs following years of hedge-funded short-selling avarice, but a couple of celebrities are being thrown to a torch-bearing, pitchfork-wielding mob, taking the heat off the proper thieving swine. And the BBC is made to kow-tow yet again for completely the wrong reasons! Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?

Sense of proportion, much?

STOP PRESS: For anyone puzzled by events and wondering wtf Ross and Brand actually did, there's a thorough precis at New Internationalist.
... So when Gordon Brown insists, that the illegal invasion of Iraq, which has cost tens of thousands of lives and is paid for by the British taxpayer, is to ensure that ‘the new Iraqi democracy is properly safeguarded’ – where are the 30,000 complaints to the BBC when that that particular obscenity is broadcast on Newsnight? ...

Russell Brand responds to the Daily Mail

Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand's original offending phone message to Andrew Sachs