Cancel the Culture of Cancel

In modern times, the term “Cancel-culture” has been prevalent in social media outlets. In platforms where the right to freedom of speech and expression should be valued, it seems ironic that individuals would revoke others just by standing out.

#CancelTheCultureOfCancel

Written by Monzam Wang
Illustrated by Mic Santiago

Posted on March 18, 2022 | 10:20 AM

Remember in 2020, when famous TikTok star Bella Poarch faced backlash over her tattoo of Japan's rising sun, the flag of Japanese Imperialist forces, and millions of people criticized her for insensitivity and indifference. This symbol is deemed offensive due to the history of the oppression during Japanese Imperialism in Korea. She was then “canceled,” with the verb seen in comments, shares, and posts regarding the issue. Cancel-culture, the culture that rejects any idea of personal development and forgiveness is, according to Kato (2021), the phenomenon of promoting the “canceling” of people, brands, and even shows and movies due to what some consider to be offensive or problematic remarks or ideologies. According to the dictionary definition of Merriam Webster, the word “cancel” means “to destroy the force, effectiveness, or validity of.” Many might argue that this will push and make the person realize the severity of the issue. However, this is not guaranteed. There are several other ways to reprimand and hold people accountable than by going through this entire phenomenon motivated towards the disappearance or dis-existence of a thing. The word itself holds much weight. Cancel-Culture only spreads extra hate across the internet, takes away room for self-improvement, robs freedom of choice; all without necessarily resulting in genuine repentance of the canceled person.

The youth of this generation have lived in Internet culture for almost all of their lives. Therefore, they are aware, first-hand, of the projected media in Cancel-culture. Cancel-culture should not be practiced because the people are “canceled” and not “held accountable.” This must be emphasized in the discussion because the culture of being “canceled” encourages zero improvements on the part of those who are canceled. It seems like the only way to get out of the canceled label is to be reborn into a new person. According to O’Brien (2021), the idea that a good apology will solve a problem in our personal lives may be true, but it is a myth when it comes to Cancel-culture and the current climate of mob aggression. When “canceled,” even simple apologies and genuine repentance are met with an indifferent and maybe sarcastic audience. This is because when canceled, you are done, finished, and gone. Though this does not justify the one at fault, how would a person feel when their sincerity is met with mockery? When we “cancel” something, it results in a complete boycott and nothingness of the canceled, but when we hold people accountable, we are holding them captive in their position, letting them know of the wrong in their actions. After the necessary consequences and actions brought about by this “captivity,” they may eventually be let go for the public to move on as well.

It is also important for the general public to have a choice in this matter. Whether an individual is to support a business or an artist is their personal choice according to their own morals and standards. Having the general public be the executioner of a career is a high position to take on in society. Even if the people who did wrong continue to succeed after being canceled, such as American rapper Chris Brown due to his continuous allegations of sexual assault, it should still be our individual choice to support or not to support them. It is also related here the debate of whether or not personal agendas (e.g. personal problems in marriage, political stances, etc.) of artists must affect the art they create for the public. Many people may boycott Lai Guanlin, a Korean pop star from Taiwan, for posting and announcing Chinese pride for the P.R.O.C. flag in his Weibo account, while others may believe that his political view should not interfere with his produced work and art. Whether one chooses to like him or dislike him are personal, individual choices—precisely what Cancel-culture takes from us. The majority of public opinion dictates whether we should or should not support a person, group, or business by taking music off the racks, distinguishing careers, stopping production, and more. This lack of our freedom is something that is not favorable in Cancel-culture.

The “executioner” that is the public is also imperfect. Some arguments may not be well-articulated and fake news may emerge from this massive cancel movement. It does not benefit both the executioner and the executed. We can avoid this extra spillage of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation if we simply take it upon ourselves to research and fact-check. By doing so, we can act accordingly with this knowledge. If everybody does this, we can hold people accountable without having to spread extra aggression and extra hate throughout the internet. Imagine if you are the talk of a situation and suddenly, lies, false rumors, and attacks about matters relating to or not relating to the topic arise. Would that not be frustrating to see as both the canceler and the canceled?

Cancel-culture is a culture that is getting out of hand, controlled by massive people all across the internet. The internet can be quick, hasty, and rash, but at the end of the day, it is important to be respectful and have the patience to empathize with all kinds of people. Protect your freedom and spread your belief with compassion and accountability. We give people a chance to repent and change. It is not as simple as it sounds, but we can be a more united and humane kind of people by then.