Victoria Strassler | Copy Editor
Featured image courtesy of Pixabay
We witness this time and time again. It can be the most poisonous, yet ineffective, action. Cancel culture, also known as call-out culture or outrage culture, has made its way to society and has become quite a natural path for many to take, thanks to social media.
In 2019, this type of mentality gained popularity and went mainstream as we were witnessing the “cancelling” of our once-favourite social media influencers, celebrities, singers, authors, and other public figures.
What is Cancel Culture?
Cancel culture is a form of public humiliation targeted at individuals and groups who have showcased problematic, controversial or offensive behaviour. One may have posted a racist tweet or problematic video as quick as an hour ago or as distant as seven years ago. Social media users call for action on essentially “cancelling” this individual or group.
Charles Matthew Mishiyev, a second-year history student, defines cancel culture as: “A movement to silence people who tend to be politically incorrect, as well as people who do something so terrible they must never be forgiven.”
Andrea McKenzie, associate professor in the Writing Department, defines cancel culture as what was once “creating a boycott of that person for making inappropriate comments or performing inappropriate actions,” but she says the term can now be applied to a much broader concept because “the term ‘cancel’ is now used so broadly.”
Those who are cancelled are typically in the public eye, although anyone can be targeted nowadays. They are boycotted by now ex-fans and supporters, and they receive a decline in popularity, relevancy, and social media following due to their controversial actions or words.
Thousands of posts and trending hashtags are made with the name or group followed by “is cancelled,” and there is a sense of mob mentality that is attached to this behaviour. Although there are a lot of positives that can come out of cancel culture, there are also a lot of negatives that occur because of this stigma.
The Positives
The intention of cancel culture is clear, although the execution and consistency of declared cancelling needs a little work. Nonetheless, there have been instances where cancel culture has been effective and successful. According to CNN, cancel culture gained popularity in 2019, which means that the amount of individuals who got cancelled also increased in numbers.
For example, the cancelling of singer R. Kelly, comedian Shane Gillis, and sports commentator Don Cherry are three examples of how this phenomenon works.
Kelly, Gillis, and Cherry will not likely be accepted into the mainstream ever again. Cancel culture cost these three problematic individuals their jobs, social status, and social acceptance. This is how cancel culture can be used for good. Those who have made controversial decisions or offensive comments should not be glamorized and should not have a platform upon which to speak.
Individuals should be held accountable for their actions. Everyone is aware of what they are tweeting or posting. If they are posting it a day ago or five years ago, they wanted it to be posted online. They are just now expressing regret for saying or doing such a thing because they are being cancelled and called out for their behaviour. Should they have gotten away with it, nothing would have changed.
Roshini Gibeau, third-year professional writing student, says that the good that can come out of cancel culture is “spreading awareness about certain social issues, especially sexual harassment.”
Gibeau also explains that it is “a good tactic to spread awareness about public figures who have documented repeated problematic behaviour that we cannot prosecute them for, but the public should be aware of, like those who repeatedly use racist terms.”
Emily Phung, third-year culture and expression student, says that because of cancel culture, “bad people or role models would be exposed — this brings out perspectives and points of views on certain stories so they aren’t one sided. “Essentially, no one is safe from this method of accountability. But there is an easy solution — just don’t post anything problematic. Although, the problem with this solution is people don’t think they are being problematic in the first place.
Yes, people can change. Yes, people should be given second chances. But, people who have already made it clear that they have misguided intentions should have to make it clear and prove that they now have the right intentions — if they don’t, this is when the cancelling returns.
Cancel culture is effective because it scares people. It doesn’t necessarily take that negative thought or action out of their minds, but it does keep people from posting problematic content. This then creates a more positive online community. It will benefit those who may come into the public eye in the future; they won’t have to worry about being the least favourite contestant on a reality show because of a tweet from 2012.
The Negatives
Critics against cancel culture are just as powerful as the advocates for it. Critics say that often times, individuals or groups are cancelled for a very insignificant or irrelevant reason, and cancelling someone has been deemed a stretch.
There have been times where a tweet may have been misinterpreted or misunderstood by someone who is generally well-liked by the public. An attempt to cancel this individual is made, yet the critics arise and comment how there is no need for this person to be cancelled because there is nothing to cancel.
Diandra Mamorno, third-year communications studies student, expresses her thoughts on the flaws of this culture: “Some of us have grown to be more sensitive and take things the wrong way or too far, where the person on the other end either can’t take back what they’ve done or said, or explain themselves properly.”
McKenzie shares that: “Cancel culture is being used unthinkingly, and it’s now so widespread that it’s doing harm to the wrong people, especially youth. Imagine being ‘cancelled’ by your friends for some trivial reason without any discussion – such as the young woman who was cancelled for being ‘emotionally needy.’ That’s not at all helpful to her or to those who boycotted her.”
Additionally, some public figures may have stronger and more loyal fanbases than others, which means it will be harder to cancel these individuals. However, that is contradictory to the principles behind the method. What makes one person worthy of being cancelled and not the other?
For example, sexual abuse allegations against Michael Jackson came to surface in 2019, yet he is still praised and remembered as the King of Pop. His legacy is so dominant in our culture that people may not want to accept or acknowledge his questionable past.
In a WIRED article called “Concerning Consent, Chappelle, and Cancelling Cancel Culture,” Emma Grey Ellis gives a list of individuals or companies who have been cancelled, yet are still relevant and supported. The list included Logan Paul, Kanye West, Gucci, Shania Twain, and Disney’s upcoming live-action remake of Mulan.
The aforementioned have been cancelled at some point, yet they still remain relevant. Why have these groups never successfully been cancelled? Why does cancel culture not always work? Why are we consistent with cancelling some people and not others?
Cancel culture is often associated with other calls to action that have been proven to be ineffective, such as deplatforming, hashtag activism, Internet vigilantism, mobbing, online shaming, ostracism, shunning and slacktivism. These forms of group action are often associated with cancel culture because of how toxic and ineffective they can be.
There is this mob mentality that exists because of how social media users continuously defame individuals or groups and warn others of not supporting who is being cancelled. Those who do support whoever is cancelled are often threatened and attacked by others online for their disinterest in boycotting. Not only is there conflict between who is being cancelled and those doing the cancelling, but there is a conflict between the supporters and the critics.
Paul McLaughlin, a professor in the Writing Department, explains his critiques on this type of behaviour: “I have never supported the kind of mob mentality that sometimes accompanies this type of hysterical anger. We have laws to deal with hate speech so I see no reason for the mob to gang up on someone whose ideas are different from theirs.”
“I am particularly concerned when university students or staff embrace cancel culture. I have always believed that a university should be a safe place for people to express their viewpoints, even if I don’t agree with them,” McLaughlin continues.
Mob mentality is when it can become dangerous. Mobs do not have rationale when taking action. This is when misinformation can be spread in the heat of cancelling. This is when lives are at stake because such behaviour quickly turns into bullying.
“The whole point of cancel culture is to bully people into submission where they can never really defend themselves or have a voice,” Mishiyev explains. There may also be some who are wrongly accused or cancelled, yet there are still those who continue to harass and mock them.
In addition to cancel culture being aggressive, it is also lazy. Often at times, social media users will be very loud and aggressive in who they are cancelling, yet within a few weeks or months, it is as if nothing has happened. This is how cancel culture relates to slacktivism. We cancel these individuals and make it very clear that we are not to support whomever, yet as soon as the person flies under the radar, stays quiet, and does not attract any negative public attention, they make a return as if they were never cancelled.
We say we will cancel, yet we don’t actually do so. Why is that? Phung says that “cancel culture may not work because of how fast we choose to keep and dispose of trends, thanks to social media platforms.”
Cancel culture can be negative because of its power to be too effective, yet all while being too ineffective at the same time.
Your Decision
It is essentially your call on whether or not to hop on the bandwagon of boycotting an individual or group. You may find that someone is being wrongfully cancelled, or that not enough attention is being brought to cancel someone.
“Cancel culture is honestly dangerous. It’s so easy to do now because of social media. People can be very harsh, even if the person being ‘cancelled’ may or may not deserve it. It isn’t the right way to prove someone is wrong in whatever they have done or said,” Phung explains.
“Cancel culture can be very helpful to call out bad, harmful and abusive people or things but just like anything on social media, it can be taken too far and must be looked at with a grain of salt,” Emily Fitzpatrick, third-year English student, says.
Cancel culture is overall a mindset that definitely needs improvement. The intent is there, but the execution is flawed. We need to work on just not supporting someone instead of making a huge ordeal about our boycotting online. Cancelling people essentially gives them more publicity. Do you want to cancel someone? Simply don’t talk about the person.
McKenzie put it best: “Before we cancel, we need to think critically about why we’re doing it. Period.”
