A lot of people who most loudly decry cancel culture are themselves big practitioners of it and are just being hypocrites - I'm referring to celebrity pundits and other public figures, not you.
"Cancel culture" is one of the dumbest fads this year. It's a new, vague name for things that already have a name: boycott, mobbing, witchhunting, censorship, etc., depending on who or how you are "canceling".
Judging by how I've seen it used in social media, it's a loud way to band together and harass someone before bothering to research facts or context, feel morally superior, and at the same time achieve nothing of consequence.
I don't think "cancel culture" is a well enough defined term to think much of it.
What I do think is that people who complain about "cancel culture" have questionable motives. Because, and this is anecdotal, it's mostly reactionary grifters on Twitter who bring it up. I acknowledge there are some people who get concerned about it because of who they follow online (I follow Paul Graham, and there are definitely some grifters in his retweets.)
I think that it’s useful to hear a balanced take on cancel culture from someone that’s not, frankly, some Hollywood figure making dumb “cancel culture” jokes because they’re secretly pooping their pants over when it’s going to happen to them.
OK thanks for the link to Wikipedia. Here's what I think: the term "cancel culture" is amorphous, and deliberately so, so people upset about it can act principled while engaging in blatant hypocrisy and motivated reasoning.
'cancel culture' either doesn't exist, or is a new means of explaining an old phenomenon, depending on what you mean. I honestly immediately loose respect for anyone using it non-ironically, because it's just an obvious ploy to manipulate public opinion.
I'm usually against cancel culture. Except against those that partake in it. I'll admit I feel a lot of schadenfreude when those people get canceled themselves and they're held to their own standards.
That's exactly it. Cancel culture as a term is used as a term to deride anyone bucking the system as this point.
In case a)(this one), it's used to put down people who don't agree with singing a song, later we will see b) where a lot of netizens pile on someone when they had incorrect information and further we will see c) where people displaying Nazi salutes are complaining about deplatforming.
If anyone wants to have a conversation about any of these, then we can, but to decry cancel culture is just trying to lump in the good reasoning with the bad.
The challenge with this debate is that the meaning of "cancel culture" is too broad, verging on incoherent. Examples of "cancellation" range from people who experienced harsh consequences for minimal or imaginary "offenses", like Justine Sacco and Donald McNeil, to powerful serial sex offenders like Harvey Weinstein.
Not defending cancel culture. But those who are complaining about it would be more credible if they didn’t themselves try to keep marginalized groups down themselves. Example: pretty much any opinion host on Fox News.
reply