By definition, Cancel Culture isused to refer to a form of ostracism in which someone is thrust out of social or professional circles – whether it be online, on social media, or in person (Wikipedia). The advancement of technology, and social media as a means for revenue, have artists more susceptible to experiencing this type of ostrasizing. Cancel Culture occurs daily for people in the spotlight, however, there is no way to determine it’s lasting affects. This is because sometimes cancel culture completely ends someones career, and sometimes it can last as short as a week. That is just the climate that we live in--as permanent as social media is, anything that goes viral--is just that, viral. Viral moments don’t last long if at all, but people in the public spotlight are prone to face more viral moments than the average person. Subsequently, there are blogs, websites, and media outlets that will further this agenda of cancel culture, by reposting old viral moments. Things generally go viral and circulate a lot of attention when blogs or crazed fans research things that public figures said before fame.
Personally, I think the affects of cancel culture are inhumane, and dangerous. As spectators, we often forget, that before someone was a public figure, they were human--just like us. These are real people with real feelings, who are entitled to their opinions. However, cancel culture can be affective for the right reasons when public figures who we expect to uphold a certain image, derail from who they claim to be. For example, I recently saw a post about a known woman in politics who stepped down from her position after video recordings of her saying racial slurs--got leaked. In this case, she should have to face the consequences to her actions. The reason this is not always affective is because the media picks and chooses when to hold people accountable, and what should or should not be forgiven. When this happens, we cancel people for minor things that likely don’t affect us in our every day lives, and we don’t allow them to recover from it. Yet that are certain public figures and institutions that are still thriving and making profit, despite being exposed for things that they should’ve been canceld for.
For example, a few years ago, members of the black community “canceled,” Gucci for selling a garment that mocked black people and black culture. Clearly, Gucci is still thriving and in business. This is because, for one, black people are not the only ones who support this brand, and secondly, all members of the black community did not take offense to it, or whatever the case may be. As a minority, I understood why people chose to boycott this brand, however, I found it ineffective when there are brands such as Tommy Hilfiger or Abercrombie and Fitch, who have had owners who were publicly racist or homophobic--yet these businesses are still up and thriving. As much as we would like to disbar every intitution, most of the time cancel culture gets everyone in an uproar about whomever is in the spotlight, but in the end I feel it really shows how hypocritical we are as people, because we support so many other people and brands who for a fact share different beliefs than we do.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/apr/19/abercrombie-fitch-netflix-documentary-fashion-discrimination
Mari, your inclusion of brands like Gucci, Abercrombie, and Hilfiger are super interesting. If you are interested, there is a documentary on Netflix called "White Hot" that talks about their questionable business practices, I recommend it. I think large business like the ones you have mentioned have so much social and economic power, it can be hard to really impact these businesses. However, I really pay attention to how and where I spend my money so that I have a rough idea of what kind of business practices that my purchase funds. I have found that ethical consumption on the individual level has been a great way for me to contribute (no matter how small) to ethical practices! However, I…
I totally agree. Social media has changed the game on how people approach cancellation as a whole. That really tells us how impactful social networks are for the reputation of a personality or normal person. However, as it has been mentioned that celebrities or companies are not affected, those who are really affected are ordinary people who have other thoughts and ideals. Great work, Mari!
Maria, I always enjoy from personal examples you bring in your writing. Your illustrations of canceling Gucci by black people and then existing racist or homophobic people at the head of brands like Tommy Hilfiger or Abercrombie and Fitch depict how "cancel culture" is a complex phenomenon. Keep up the good work.
Shamaria, I thought your discussion about how fame and social media have changed the affects of cancel culture was really interesting. I agree that people need to remember that even famous people are humans too and are put under heavy scrutiny all the time. I also agree that the media is a large deciding factor in who and how someone gets cancelled. But at the end of the day, like you said, some people/ companies are too powerful or have too much influence to truly get cancelled.