Alexi McCammond’s career as a journalist was on the rise. She worked for Axios as a political reporter and was a regular on television news (Robertson).
Jeffrey Toobin was a lawyer-turned-journalist who won numerous awards. He contributed to The New Yorker, CNN, and authored a New York Times best-selling book about O.J. Simpson (Rosman and Bernstein).
Mimi Groves was admitted into the prestigious University of Tennessee cheerleading squad, the reigning national champions (Levin).
Each and every one of these lives has been tarnished.
Different situations, identical outcomes, yet each victim was engulfed in the circumstance of “cancel culture”. This phenomenon drives people, brands, and even shows and movies to be “canceled” because of what some believe to be offensive or objectionable words or beliefs.
Social media’s penetrating gaze and unrestrained virality incited the devastation and decline of their careers. These lives were thrown into disarray in inconceivable ways. Because of social media’s magnifying powers, society’s profound divisions, and the difficulty of redressing long-standing imbalances, this issue has escalated.
McCammond was set to take over as editor-in-chief of Teen Vogue in March 2021. However, offensive tweets from her teenage years resurfaced that upset employees. McCammond resigned before she could even begin (Robertson).
Similarly, Jeffrey Toobin experienced a wave of backlash after inappropriately exposing himself during a staff Zoom call, costing him a number of jobs (Rosman and Bernstein).
Indiscretions are heavily punished during this era of cancellation. Subsequent to the media release of Toobin’s incident, public opinion was quick to pounce. On The Tonight Show, Mr. Toobin was excessively ridiculed by Jimmy Fallon. Donald J. Trump Jr., whom Toobin had chastised, joyously heckled the journalist on Twitter (Rosman, Bernstein).
The question of what to do with the “canceled” continues to be debated: should their jobs be cut completely, indefinitely, and without review? Should they be punished in proportion to their offense? Is there a time limit on their punishment?
Former President Barack Obama condemned cancel culture and “woke” politics in 2019, describing the tendency as people “be[ing] as judgmental as possible about other people” and added, “That’s not activism” (Romano).
Slamming public figures through social media irreversibly changes lives. Disagreements are no longer reconciled through respectful conversation. As a result, even the non-famous are experiencing distress as many become victims of the circumstance.
Former ACLU president Nadine Strossen expressed tremendous worry about cancel culture’s stifling effect on adolescence at a recent conference devoted to making a nonpartisan “Case Against Cancel Culture”. She stated, “I constantly encounter students who are so fearful of being subjected to the Twitter mob that they are engaging in self-censorship.”
Strossen noted the isolated cases of kids whose college applications were revoked due to racist social media remarks as an example of this chilling effect (Romano).
The harm produced by collective bullying and individual cancellation for relatively trivial, one-time acts or words (without the chance of correction) typically outweighs the harm caused by the actual event or comment. Should someone’s reputation or employment – their entire livelihood, possibly even their family’s – be jeopardized because of a single tweet? Do they deserve their lives to be ripped apart, their houses to be attacked, and death threats to be sent to their inboxes?
At its best, cancel culture has aimed to correct power inequities and redistribute power to those who lack it. Instead, it appears that the phenomenon has become a weapon for those in positions of power to use against the people it was supposed to benefit.
Even so, offensive words or behavior on public platforms should still be discouraged in some way. While perhaps it is going too far to allow one-time slips to ruin lives, a positive online space should be maintained without the toxic practice of cancel culture.
Refuse to let individuals in positions of power dictate how our conversations are conducted. Cancel culture’s reliance on the whims and wills of the masses means that if we speak independently and alone, we will not be able to move forward collectively.
Social media should be based on apologies and forgiveness, where mistakes are seen as opportunities for change rather than punishment. We’ve all made mistakes and said or done things we later regret. Even on the internet, we all deserve second chances.
Works Cited:
[1] Ballard, Jamie. “A Majority of Americans Think Cancel Culture Is a Big Problem.” July 2020. YouGovAmerica, YouGov PLC, 28 July 2020, today.yougov.com/topics/entertainment/articles-reports/2020/07/28/cancel-culture-yahoo-news-poll-data. Accessed 14 Feb. 2022.
[2] Levin, Dan. “A Racial Slur, a Viral Video, and a Reckoning.” The New York Times, 18 Mar. 2021, www.nytimes.com/2020/12/26/us/mimi-groves-jimmy-galligan-racial-slurs.html. Accessed 9 Feb. 2022.
[3] Robertson, Katie. “Teen Vogue Editor Resigns after Fury over Racist Tweets.” The New York Times, 10 May 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/business/media/teen-vogue-editor-alexi-mccammond.html. Accessed 9 Feb. 2022.
[4] Romano, Aja. “The Second Wave of ‘Cancel Culture.'” Vox, Vox Media, 5 May 2021, www.vox.com/22384308/cancel-culture-free-speech-accountability-debate. Accessed 10 Feb. 2022.
[5] —. “Why We Can’t Stop Fighting about Cancel Culture.” Vox, Vox Media, 25 Aug. 2020, www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022.
[6] Rosman, Katherine, and Jacob Bernstein. “The Undoing of Jeffrey Toobin.” The New York Times, 10 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/style/jeffrey-toobin-zoom.html. Accessed 9 Feb. 2022.
Jessica T