What is “Cancel Culture”?
To “cancel someone” has become a common phrase circulating the internet; stemming from the phenomenon (often referred to as a modern form of ostracism): Cancel Culture. Cancel Culture often takes place when a public figure participates in a controversial act or behaves in a manner that could greatly offend others.
Those subject to such a modern-day phenomenon are said to be “Cancelled” and can face a cultural block from maintaining a public platform or immense support from the public. Although usually this only includes them facing immense amounts of backlash from the public; with their career remaining intact.
To cancel someone entails them no longer supporting the offender in any manner; this can be done through boycotting films, not buying their books, not consuming their art e.t.c. This phenomenon has especially risen in recent years with the globalisation and development of technology, allowing people to voice their opinions with little to no restrictions online. One of the main reasons for Cancel Culture is for the public to be able to hold public figures accountable for their actions; especially since platforms such as social media have allowed the public to effectively communicate with figures that were once excused and put away on a high pedestal in society.
That being said, as with any discussion on the internet, a polarising debate has been circulating “Cancel Culture” and just how effective it is to hold someone accountable in such a manner?
Is Cancel Culture truly progressive?
Pros
1. Can work towards bringing out social change and maintaining moral boundaries
With cancel and callout culture becoming a more prominent phenomenon within social media, many are starting to call this a modern form of boycott; and even going as far as claiming it to be an addition to the civil rights movements; hoping to bring about social change and maintain moral boundaries. Particularly on a place like social media; which can be a ruthless community of individuals saying whatever they want with no consideration to the weight of their actions; cancel culture can allow moral boundaries to be looked after. Especially where the justice system cannot protect those targeted or prejudiced against through one’s actions and words.
2. Amplifying the marginalised & victimised voices
When a person partakes in an offensive act (especially public figures), individuals are quick to bring attention to this and criticise them on their actions, allowing the marginalised communities to be advocated for. Since cancel culture involves the individual facing public backlash, chances are a lot of attention is brought to the conflict of interest, meaning those less powerful voices that may be ignored on a daily basis can finally be heard. This also provides a gateway for the marginalised to seek accountability from those at fault; while raising awareness regarding the issue at hand. For example, cancel culture has played a large part in standing up against racist behaviour (especially by those with influence).
Celebrities such as Roseanne Barr, who lost her hit TV show after racist tweets, are proving that the common public is very much capable of controlling the power they have on these celebrities’ careers by choosing to support their actions or not. Despite such examples, the effectiveness and legitimacy of the impact of Cancel Culture have been questioned, and rightfully so. A-list celebrities such as J.K.Rowling are continuing to profit off of the lucrative Harry Potter series, despite being “cancelled” for her transphobic views online; and offending thousands of individuals who looked up to her growing up. This raises the question, will Cancel Culture ever work to achieve social justice for those discriminated against by A-List celebrities? Or is it still not enough yet.
Cons
1. Not a very productive method of bringing out social justice
Although Cancel Culture allows people to hold public figures accountable for their actions, it isn’t the most productive method to bring about social justice. Recently, culture has been used to outright hate on public figures and spread false information regarding them and their situation, instead of holding them accountable and educating them. According to Aaron Rose, Corporate Diversity and Inclusion Consultant, “Mainstream Internet activism is a lot about blaming and shaming.” which is explicitly evident online when a public figure gets “cancelled”. Many take this opportunity to just trend a hashtag, spread false facts to aggravate the situation or send death threats; rather than educating them and the public on why the action was problematic to begin with. This easily amplifies the situation and drowns out the voices of the victims; the marginalised; and the individuals who care to hold public figures accountable to ensure a positive change is made - no matter how small or large that change may be.
2. People systematically alienate anyone with opposing views
According to Britannica, as Professor Emeritus in California Polytechnic State University says “Some members of the cancelling group join in fear of being cancelled themselves. People should be able to speak out or remain silent without fear of retribution”. A growing flaw with Cancel Culture is how it is consequently eliminating a flow of discussion with a range of polarising views. Social media has always consisted of users with diverse perspectives on topics - whether they are about pop culture or controversial social issues, however with Cancel Culture, people are starting to fear the backlash that might come from having a difference of opinion. This leads to many agreeing with whatever seems to be the most “popular” opinion one finds scrolling through comments.
In a situation where the opportunity to educate and gain awareness is abundant; due to the characteristics of the cancel culture we all are exposed to today; many fear the repercussions of stating their true opinion, or even staying quiet on the issue - even if they are educating themselves on their own. This could be a debate on its own, as it depends on what the conflict on hand is. Depending on the severity of the issue, would staying silent just be ignorant or is it justified from the fact that one has the full right to remain silent if they wish to? And could having an opposing view spread more hate to the discriminated, or allow people to be more open-minded online?
Dealing with Cancel Culture Online: Should you join in?
As more people have access to the internet and social media; chances are you will see more instances of well-known individuals getting cancelled. As this culture becomes a more prominent part of our modern society, the question arises if you should take part in such a culture and its consequences; or simply observe through your feed?
The answer is pretty simple: if you want to be heard, join in. That being said, it is crucial to remember that tweeting a hashtag in support of cancelling an individual or calling them “disgusting” will not bring about change in any way. You would just be adding on to the hundreds of similar comments already made. Instead, take this opportunity to inform the public why you are as disappointed as you are. Contributing with meaningful comments that can help explain why their actions are wrong, allow true social justice to stem, help amplify the voices of those targeted by supporting them, and educate not only the figure but the general public as well - perhaps helping them understand why moral boundaries should be respected and maintained.
In addition, it is important to remember that not every apology is yours to accept. Online, people are quick to get offended on others' behalf; feel entitled to situations that do not involve them, and use such situations as an excuse to jump on bandwagons to hate on people. If you are not directly affected or targeted by the actions of a figure or any individual for that matter - make sure you first listen to the opinions of those who are.
By immediately agreeing and basing your own comments off of the “popular view”, the genuine opinions of those directly affected can get drowned out. This is counter-productive as the individual who has committed morally unjustified acts would end up apologising to reduce the influx of hate, instead of apologising to those truly offended and trying to learn from it. Hence it is extremely important that you listen to all opinions, especially of those that have been directly targeted to understand why they may be responding the way they are. A prime example is the women who shared their traumatic experiences when the #MeToo movement started rising. The celebrities being targeted with these accusations had dedicated fans that spread several comments invalidating these women and their experiences - despite their accusations being proven. Hence listening to the voices that matter in such situations before inputting your opinion help the victims rightfully hold the offender accountable for their actions, and can encourage others who are also victimised to stand up for themselves.
Whether you take part in cancelling culture or not, this is a growing phenomenon within our society and it is important to note its impact. There are certainly advantages to this culture; with the idea of moral boundaries being respected being a key one. However much like anything else on the internet, there are some disadvantages to this phenomenon that questions the efficiency of this act as a whole. Either way, if you do decide to take part in the act of Cancel Culture, make sure you are mindful of the situation on hand and everyone affected. Only then could this phenomenon be used more effectively, and perhaps bring about “social justice” onto a place like the internet.
Sources:
Writing: Tisya Gupta
Editing: Shen Tan
Graphics: Joyce Liang
Comments