My Critical Essays

To Cancel is to be Cancelled PT 3

The Future Concerning 'Cancel Culture'

Many hypotheticals surround 'cancel culture'. Like, will it be cancelled itself? Or, will society subvert the idea of 'cancel culture' and create a culture of accountability— where avenues of reconciliation and restoration become possible?

Social Media Influencer, Asher Lieberman, explained his view on 'cancel culture' and the future of the paradoxical phenomenon,

"I feel like instead of, you know, immediately rushing to someone's comments and saying horrible things, you should definitely hold them accountable for what they did wrong....Definitely address any past mistakes or anything you've done wrong. But then, from that point moving on, you should allow for the person to grow and learn and be accountable for their actions and not do it again. I think the second time they do it again, they're never gonna learn from mistakes, they deserve to just not be on the internet anymore."

Societal culture initiates the change, where we want to grow and learn from our past mistakes, yet media culture is more prejudiced, and thus, more predisposed. Asher points out, rather than a future of where 'cancel culture' dictates 'social media', a progression to a future where people are able to hold themselves accountable is more preferable.

Furthermore, 'cancel culture' has been deemed ineffective on many accounts, "Cancel Culture Is Ineffective. Canceling someone for a particular reason merely buries an issue without facing it ... We stopped having discussions and open dialogues, to instead shut people down and "banish" them. We shut people down when we sense what is considered "immoral behavior," but in fact, tearing someone down and getting "rid" of them is what should be regarded as immoral." 'Cancel culture' teaches a generation that forgiveness is a hard earned virtue, which is near to impossible to achieve. While the phenomenon still has a hold on society, we will not be able to grow if we shut down different political views.

It is further believed that 'cancel culture' will be eradicated as the harmful impacts of 'cancel culture' will be realised:

"Cancel culture is not really a new phenomenon. A lack of toleration of people who think and speak differently, and a belief that their airing such views is harmful and offensive, is historically normal for political societies and still the case in many parts of the world today (Russia, China). Tolerance of people who think differently when you have the power to suppress them, is hard work. But intolerance comes at a cost: you increasingly alienate and fail to understand other groups, and your own community becomes vulnerable to groupthink and group polarisation effects. It may be that these costs will start to halt the rise of cancel culture."

By eliminating everyone who has opinions that differ from others' ideologies, it creates a community that conforms and thinks the exact same. To promote tolerance and inclusivity, there is a need to have others who think differently.

The future of 'cancel culture' may also be a continuity in society, as personal judgement may be more arbitrary than political agendas. Hugh Breakey explained, "There will be less informed public deliberation because both sides of politics will be too busy being outraged by the other side to have a meaningful discussion with them. This will impact on the legitimacy of our political institutions: you have less reason to trust democracy if you think that the other side despises you and wants to suppress you." With the fall of democracy, it would mean that more anarchy in society, leading to a more destructive future.

There are also people who support the continuation of 'cancel culture', however are still uncomfortable with the harmful aspects of the phenomenon, "I worry about the harmful aspects [such as] harassment, self censorship, but fully support more accountability for harmful behaviour." 'Cancel culture' has been effective at fighting sexism, racism, or any other types of abuse, which could mean the inclination to side with the phenomenon, allowing it to increase in popularity and usage. Alexandra D'Amour states, "Cancel culture demands social change and addresses the deep inequalities in keeping the oppressed oppressed." and further on explains the positive outcomes 'cancel culture' has had on society. As with everything else, 'cancel culture' has positive and negative aspects towards its image, creating multiple standpoints on the paradox.

In the content analysis that was conducted on a YouTube video of the 'cancelling' of JK Rowling, it was discovered that out of the 105 comments, 5.7% of those agreed with the idea of 'cancel culture', with one comment stating, "JK Rowling is the most unexpected red pill of 2020." 37.1% of the comments were in complete discordance with the use of 'cancel culture', with one comment saying, "You're completely wrong about being cancelled on twitter. These people get mobs to contact employers and get people fired, sure if you're rich it doesn't matter, but getting cancelled will destroy your life." With these statistics, it is easy to say that 'cancel culture' is on its way to become eradicated, however, the phenomenon is much more complex than that. Even though the majority is in agreeance to 'cancel' 'cancel culture' itself, there is still a minority of people who believe that 'cancel culture' is effective in increasing social inclusion. Nonetheless, with the onlook of the trend, the future of 'cancel culture' seems to be clearer and clearer.

Nevertheless, 'cancel culture' has created a society where conflicts of interest have social media and public figures polarised. The future of 'cancel culture' resides in society's decisions and in which direction the future is headed. Thus, 'cancel culture', with the two sides of the media and public figures, may stay or evolve into something more progressive.