The Ethics of Cancel Culture

For the past two decades, the term “cancel culture” has taken the world by storm. Many heated debates regarding the legitimacy and ethics of cancel culture has dominated various academic and media circles. The modern version of society exiling an individual for any wrongdoing (or “cancellations”) can be traced to the aughts of social media platforms such as Tumblr, where the infamous Tumblr blog “Your fave is problematic” listed celebrities’ regrettable (for lack of a better term) actions and statements (Kaplan, 2021).

Others have attempted to trace societal exclusions as far back as ancient Greece, when they “practiced a kindred rite, using a human sacrifice, the pharmakos, who was beaten and promenaded in the streets before being exiled, which was considered a kind of death.” (Mishan, 2020). It is important to note the many instances of men in positions of power, abusing said power and those around them. These same men have been able to lay low for some time and resurface within a few years. This brings forth the question: is cancel culture real? This essay aims to demonstrate how cancel culture is reactionary in nature and is a double-edged sword. While it can drive conversations about race, religion, freedom of speech to the forefront, the consequences the person on the receiving end faces can be devastating.

To the modern participant of online culture, “cancelling” another person or organization is primarily a signal to society how particular attitudes and actions are no longer acceptable. Social media has provided regular people with a voice and more power to signal when they believe something is right or wrong (Hagi, 2019). As these conversations continue to take place online, the mob mentality has become a parasitic side effect and tare largely led by emotion, rather than by rationale. Whenever a topic or a person becomes the “main character of the day,” all nuance is lost, and consequently, some people that do not deserve the vitriol are caught in the crosshairs. There are material consequences to becoming the internet’s main character of day: some people have lost their jobs, others have attempted to take their own lives, or a combination of both.

There are material consequences to becoming the internet’s main character of day: some people have lost their jobs, others have attempted to take their own lives, or a combination of both.

For many, and especially for people belonging to disenfranchised groups, social media platforms have become outlets of expression, a place to share their frustrations with the injustices of the world, and holding conversations surrounding race, sexuality, religion, etc. The goal of cancel culture appears to be to “weed” out what most consider to be bad behaviour, especially when it comes to the case of bigoted comments and attitudes. For people that hold positions of power and can wield this power over minority groups such as the LGTBQ community and racialized groups, it is important to hold these conversations about how their attitudes are harmful and potentially dangerous. Thanks to social media this means that means that “racist, sexist, and bigoted behaviour or remarks don’t fly like they used to” (Hagi, 2019). A person’s wealth, social status or their privilege no longer shields them for seeing how their attitudes impact others, and this allows for conversations to be held regarding this topics.

During the #MeToo era of 2017, many women bravely stepped up and spoke out against the harassment they have endured at the hands of their superiors, colleagues, and partners. This conversation has forced each of us to recognize the importance of consent at every level, not just in romantic relationships. In a sense, this sense of reckoning has become a positive side effect to cancel culture, where we feel supported enough to speak our truth when we have been wronged and unsupported by the institutions meant to serve and protect us. The issue arises when a person that may be innocent become the centre of attention the day’s conversations, or the intensity of the vitriol does not match what the initial issue was.

During the #MeToo era of 2017, many women bravely stepped up and spoke out against the harassment they have endured at the hands of their superiors, colleagues, and partners.

The rise of cancel culture can be examined from the perspective that people are desperate to be heard. Sentiments of hopelessness for the future keep mounting as we face the realities of climate change, a crippling economy, increasing polarization between various groups and frustration with our leaders. All of this combined with the accessibility of social media, has fostered an environment where we are more reactionary and quicker to participate in the mob mentality of pointing fingers whenever we believe that someone has broken some sort of invisible social contract. The main issue with online “cancellations” is that it can sometimes be misdirected or misguided at the wrong person, or the intensity of the inquisition may not match the initial comment or action.

One very current example appeared on the recent Netflix documentary, Crime Scene: The Vanishing at Cecil Hotel, where the bizarre case of a black metal musician named Morbid that was thought to be guilty of the death of Elisa Lam, even though they had little to no evidence of this being true. The “online sleuths,” as he called them, based their accusations on the content of his music, and some YouTube videos he had posted around the time of her disappearance. He received death threats, his Facebook, YouTube and email were spammed with hateful messages and he eventually had to shut both of these platforms down. YouTube and Facebook were his lifeline as a musician, and in the documentary, he expressed that he felt like he “lost his freedom of expression” and is no longer making music (Hartmann, 2021). This is a very real example of how mass hysteria can have detrimental effects on a person’s life, especially when in this case, the targeted person was innocent.

Many have argued that cancel culture is not real. This is somewhat true, as we have seen many men that have been outed for their predatory and abusive tendencies are still able 5 to thrive and continue working and having faced little to no real repercussions in their life. Comedian Louis C.K. came under fire for masturbating in front of female comedians, and although his agency dropped him, he was still able to sell out five shows in Toronto in 2019 (Hagi, 2019). His career appears to have survived the very grim sexual misconduct allegations and calls for his cancellation from people online. Some of the repercussions are real (people lose their jobs, endorsement deals, etc.), but they do not remain casted out on the fringes of society. As writer Sarah Hagi points out: “we would all do well to consider the people who are actually side-lined: those who lose professional opportunities because of toxic workplaces, who spend years dealing with trauma caused by others’ actions” (Hagi, 2019).

In conclusion, cancel culture can have very serious consequences on the targeted person, but we are noticing a pattern emerge when some men commit very serious and egregious crimes, specifically against women, are able to resurface after a few years of laying low. We need to have a better system of pointing out that what someone is doing is wrong, but in a way that allows that person to learn from their mistakes. As a society increasingly relying on technology and the internet for everyday life, we need to have discernment about the battles that truly matter, and remember to punch up, rather than punch down. It is important to hold those in positions of power accountable, but in a way that will allow for respectful and conducive dialogue between the two, and in a manner that will benefit our social fabric in a positive way for future generations. To err is human, but we should always strive to be better and do better.

---

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hagi, S. (2019, November 21). Cancel Culture Is Not Real—At Least Not in the Way People Think. Retrieved from Time: https://time.com/5735403/cancel-culture-is-not-real/

Hartmann, G. (2021, February 21). Morbid: The Metal Musician Falsely Blamed for Elisa Lam’s Death . Retrieved from LOUDWIRE: https://loudwire.com/morbid-metal-musicianfalsely-blamed-elisa-lam-death/

Kaplan, L. (2021, February 25). My Year of Grief and Cancellation. Retrieved March 8, 2021, from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/25/style/your-fave-isproblematic-tumblr.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Mishan, L. (2020, December 3). The Long and Tortured History of Cancel Culture. Retrieved from The New York Times Style Magazine: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/03/tmagazine/cancel-culture-history.html