The idea of hero-worship and idolatry has marked culture since the early 20th Century. In a world that can be so overbearing and harsh, people have looked to athletes, artists and famous figures as a form of escapism. This is an attribute that has prolonged in society into the modern-day and with social media, this world of celebrity culture has only heightened with the times.
Now that social media has been essentially integrated into our daily lives, people have a key resource to feed their obsession with famous individuals. Apps like Twitter and Instagram give everyday people and celebrities a more direct interrelation. Public figures get to connect with their fans and fans get a small glimpse into their favorite idols’ lives.
However, this new form of “connection” can come to a fault. The more we learn about the people we revere through tweets, pictures, and videos, the more we realize they aren’t the faultless, sublime beings that we’ve put on a pedestal. Social media allows the public to witness some of the appalling actions and decisions that famous people make—and most of the time get away with—which compels the people as a collective to take matters into their own hands.
Cancel culture, by Merriam-Webster’s definition, is when people “demand greater accountability from public figures.” People express this practice in multiple ways whether it be by withdrawing support from a certain figure, boycotting their movies, songs and albums, or online shaming. It originated in 2017 as a term that Twitter users used when a person of prominence did something cringey or problematic, but it has now evolved into a phenomenon that spread into the mainstream and identity politics.
People from the likes of J.K Rowling, Ellen Degeneres, R. Kelly, Shane Dawson and Kanye West are just a few examples of celebrities who have been “canceled” before. Some of these cancellations were done rightfully as they involve people in power involved with misconduct. Producer Harvey Weinstein and director Woody Allen are a few of the many men in power that were canceled after many women came forward with sexual assault allegations. On top of court investigation into these allegations, the public came to a consensus that they should not be able to have a platform based on their criminal actions, marking the birth of the #MeToo movement which fights against sexual assault and harassment in the workforce.
Cancel culture, on one hand, can be a grave reflection of the political and social time that we live in—a time where there is more awareness on certain topics such as racism, homophobia, misogyny and more. In its origin, cancel culture reflected the voice of the minority who are often the casualty in most of the situations that warrants someone’s canceling. The way cancel culture typically presents itself is when a person who has made some offensive and inappropriate actions and remarks towards a marginalized group and has gotten away with it is made an example of in order to indicate that this type of ignorance is no longer accepted in this new generation.
Despite the initial intentions of canceling culture, it has metamorphosed into a different beast as many argue that it has turned to be extremely toxic, coming off as performative activism.
Many people have been outspokenly critical of the new sensation, one of the more notable critics being former President Barack Obama who weighed in saying “If all you’re doing is casting stones, you’re probably not going to get that far. That’s easy to do.” President Donald Trump, another objector, said cancel culture makes “decent Americans live in fear of being fired, expelled, shamed, humiliated and driven from society as we know it.”
J.K Rowling, a victim of cancel culture for many of her transphobic comments and tweets, was ironically an avid opposer to cancel culture and signed a letter along with over 100 writers, artists and scholars arguing that cancel culture cultivates “an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.”
The main critics of cancel culture have ironically been majorly those who are more susceptible to the wrath of cancel culture but this doesn’t go to say that their bias means that their arguments lack validity, as many other issues arise with the concept of cancel culture.
Another problem with cancel culture is the jurisdiction of it, as who really decides what and who should be canceled and to what extent? As aforementioned, one of the main occurrences in cancel culture is the resurfacing of someone’s past actions or tweets from years ago and being called out or crucified for it. Although people should be held accountable for their actions, there is something overly stringent about taking someone’s worst moment or tweet and using it to define them for the rest of their lives
However, actions such as sexual assault, blatant racism, homophobia and other acts of evil and intolerance should never be accepted, but in order to create a world where instances like that are occurring less and there is even more awareness, people need to be allowed to make mistakes instead of being mercilessly condemned into oblivion.
Cancel culture may have had principled intentions, but this vigilante mentality that perpetuated has been more lethal than beneficial. Oftentimes people in power and in prominence do not receive the consequences that they deserve, which is why canceling culture is so impactful. However, the counterproductive ideal that we must always perpetually prosecute someone for the rest of their lives for a mistake is inhumane and unproductive. Instead, we should take that energy used to cancel someone and refocus it onto education and spreading awareness so that we do create a less discriminatory and more aware space for future generations to come.
Article by Kristal Maimo-Fokum of John F. Kennedy High School
Graphic by Charles Wang of Walter Johnson High School