Trends & Takeaways

While I don’t have all the answers when it comes to cancel culture, here are some interesting things that I noticed after taking a deeper look at a few of its most recent manifestations:

The Impact of Identity

Gender

I must start by acknowledging that all but one of the “cancelled” celebrities that I chose to highlight in this project are women. Yet, to put that decision in context, an overwhelming number of entertainment sites’ running lists of “everyone who’s been cancelled” in the last few years feature predominantly women. So, that begs the larger question: Why are women getting cancelled more often than men? Are they really acting more disproportionately problematic than others? Or is it more so that women are more frequently placed under the microscope, their every move analyzed and highly-scrutinized? Has it just become commonplace for men to misbehave, so much so that when a woman does, it draws extra attention? For, as seen throughout the Ellen case, women can get quickly called out, and subsequently brutally attacked, for acting in a similar fashion to the way that some men in power have notoriously acted for... forever, with minimal consequences.

Race

And, looking at the examples that I’ve analyzed, the harshness of a cancellation was even stronger against women of color. In Lizzo’s case, her race (and also festering ideas of fatphobia) played an undeniable role in the intensity of her cancellation — as people appeared to rely on their pre-existing social biases to spew microaggressions and vitriolic hate her way, even though she was seemingly innocent in comparison to the many other problematic, discriminatory, or criminal acts that have catalyzed “cancellations.”

Age (in two ways)

Lastly, one final factor of identity that seemingly played a role in some of these celebrity cancellations was age. In the case of Charli and Dixie D’Amelio, it seems that many social media users were quick to attack their so-called “bratty” behavior while forgetting how young they are and without giving them extra room to learn and grow. The two are teenagers, after all! And teenagers thrust into the spotlight no less! And because most of those critiquing the pair’s behavior don’t actually know them, perhaps people just relied on previously-held views and stereotypes about teenage influencers (that they can be privileged and don’t work hard) to formulate their opinions on the sisters in question here.

Further, in almost all of the cases that I examined, it appeared that young people, overall, were the driving force behind cancellations, seemingly posting the most about them on social media and contributing their opinions to the conversation. But, is that only because young people are tech-savvy and spending too much time on the Internet? For, as I see it, that phenomenon may also have to do with the fact that young people are not afraid to call out problematic people when we see them. We, as a generation, can be outspoken, opinionated, informed, and passionate for social change. So, while many of us are quick to jump on the bandwagon, blindly bully, and bash celebrities without stopping to think of the consequences of our hurtful speech, many, too, are simply sick and tired of supporting people who frankly don’t deserve huge platforms. Many can recognize people who work against social progress through their words and actions instead of for it. And that, I think, is pretty powerful.

Intolerable Offenses

Through cancel culture, I believe we can learn a lot about what words or actions people are no longer willing to accept or allow to percolate within societal discussions. All eight of the “cancellations” that I explored seemingly arose due to either a celebrity’s “ignorance” or display of socially discriminatory behavior… or some combination of the two. In terms of ignorance, it appears that extreme, naive displays of privilege (Vanessa Hudgens, the D’Amelios) or a lack of consideration for anyone else’s experience (Ellen) were common amongst celebrity “cancellations.” And regarding discrimination, specifically, it appears that social media users have been very quick to speak up against instances of homophobia and transphobia (J.K. Rowling), racism (Chris Harrison), and ableism (Sia) — sharing why they believed these offenses were wrong, while, too, amplifying the voices of activists within the specific social communities most affected. In that way, it seems evident that a large number of consumers expect celebrities to act as role models to an extent, and simply don’t want to follow, support, or fund figures who act contrary to their personally held moral beliefs and values.

Empty Apologies

One major trend illuminated throughout these case studies is that celebrities rarely come off as truly sorry for their comments or actions. Instead, after they get cancelled, and more importantly, after the public backlash storm begins, endorsements are lost, and sales go down, only then do we see celebrities and influencers emerge from the woodwork to put forward sometimes scripted, empty apologies, in an attempt to move past the uproar, create referenceable “sorry” receipts (so to speak), and continue on with their career. Within cancel culture, the convenient timing of an apology is everything! To me, if someone is really sorry for something problematic that they’ve done, it would be most meaningful if they chose to apologize as soon as possible, after their own personal introspection on the incident — not after months or years, or only when swarms of other people implore them to speak up.

According to Marjorie Ingall, writer and co-creator of the Sorry Watch blog (so interesting!), “often social media apologies are “more knee-jerk than thoughtful, because the celebrity or their handlers see that they’re trending on social media and react without real forethought.” That’s why we see so many notes app, video, or Twitter post apologies — like here in the cases of Vanessa Hudgens, the D’Amelios, and Sia. In my view, these apologies definitely do come off as quickly thrown together, but also, seem to be an attempt by celebrities to humanize themselves, confronting their controversies conversationally and on apps where followers can, in theory, respond back to them and share their thoughts (unless the celebs choose to disable the comment function to avoid discussion, which they sometimes do).

It’s hard to discern exactly what it would take for an apology to transcend that emptiness and appear genuinely honest. Though, as seen in the Sorry Watch tweet below, some people have presented at least a couple of ideas:

And I agree that steps 4 and 5 seem especially important in the world of celebrity apologies. Showing that a celeb understands the impact of their words or actions is huge — because it reveals that maybe they’re not so oblivious of their status and privilege, and also of their role as an idol to many. How they behave has a wide-reaching impact, as saying or doing something negative can signal to others that it is okay. Further, stating how you will ensure that this doesn’t happen again gets at the heart of setting a plan of action. I, for one, know I largely want to see what steps a celeb plans to take (whether they’re educational, monetary, conversational, etc.) in order to learn and grow as a person as a result of their cancellation.

Still, at the end of the day, what is clear is that apologies play an important role within cancel culture for those who choose to release them, acting most often as a performative stepping stone for high profile people to move past (read: usually make enough people forget about or feel less bothered by) their more problematic moments. For, as Ingall puts it, “There is something, perhaps, cathartic about watching a famous person humble themselves to the masses, to perform the dance of accountability, even though they’re rarely actually held accountable.”

The Role of Social Media

The thing, though, that’s perhaps been made the most clear throughout this analysis of cancel culture is that the Internet is a truly wild space. Because of the inherent globalized, fairly accessible nature of social media, and especially Twitter, it has become extremely easy to share and consequently see rumors, baseless criticism of others, or misinformation. Today, public shaming is not restricted to only one’s personal social circles — instead, a negative take from one person can just keep spreading and spreading, reaching millions and even gaining traction as more people become repeatedly exposed to it, then subsequently blindly believing and adopting the information without doing their own research or fact-checking.

Additionally, because social media posts themselves (the origins of many “cancellations”) are usually instantaneous, short claims, discussion of larger social issues and conversations about some sometimes very serious, multi-faceted allegations get condensed into concise, digestible little snapshots. This succinctness, though, can have huge negative effects, as it almost naturally discourages rich, well thought-out dialogue about these “cancellations” or broader topics (like sexism, racism, etc.), and instead encourages users to take on binary stances. For example, those being cancelled are either framed as all good or all bad, with little to no room left for growth and change. And... it's obvious that humans are not as simple and clear-cut as that.

Yet, however, because it is evidently so easy to get people on board with an online “cancellation” or smear campaign, it’s worth noting that perhaps social media can (and should) also be used to gain support for good causes and begin positive, productive conversations. In fact, professor and interim Associate Dean of Howard University’s Cathy Hughes School of Communications, Tia C.M. Tyree has said that “social media-activism can have a major impact —if it’s done right.” We’ve all seen how powerful social justice campaigns like #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo have become because of the unification and support of social media — finally calling widespread attention to problems that have been pervasive in the United States for years and years. Yet, according to Tyree, and in my view, too, these acts of advocacy that may begin on social media can only make a true impact if “the campaign also exists offline,” acquires genuine, real-world support, and encourages concrete action. Without that type of action, and unless the “cancellable” offense is criminal, it appears that people forgive and forget, and the celebrities soon after get off scot free.

So, can cancel culture be productive? My take:

After all of this, I really do believe that cancel culture can be a powerful vehicle (or at least jumping off point) for social change. Because, on its face, it simply involves large groups of people unifying together against injustices and misconduct. Certain wrongdoings or hate-filled comments, that may have once been free to fill our cultural zeitgeist, are now slowly but surely being exposed and acted upon, called out, disagreed with, and deemed unacceptable by the masses in a very public way.

Further, cancel culture can also act as a major form of advocacy for groups and communities that are minority, marginalized, or disenfranchised. There is inherent power in numbers, so when people, especially people with power or those who possess cultural capital, speak out together to express their disgust or frustration and hold someone accountable for their actions, others listen. Just look at what happened in the Ellen case as proof.

However, I think that, especially recently throughout the pandemic, people have taken advantage of the potential of cancel culture, using it for evil more than good. With people spending more and more time on social media, isolated from others, cancel culture may have intensified — as people have been longing to be a part of something bigger than themselves and connect (or commiserate) with others. So, while challenging and calling out problematic behaviors together can build the bonds of a community, strengthening its shared values, it can also be very easily and quickly taken too far.

Commenting as a part of a high-profile “cancellation” has been said to be “instantly rewarding,” by psychologist Dr. Steven Hassan, “as nasty and demeaning comments aimed at “trolls” or “deplorables” allow commenters to feel morally and intellectually superior.” In that way, people can get a sort of rush when they participate, acting quickly to voice their thoughts without stopping to think critically through what they are about to say or do. That’s why much of cancel culture can come off as hurtful and harmful, even crossing the line into harassment.

For, we have to allow individuals to learn from their mistakes, to hear from others and work to change their current viewpoints. Simply bashing celebrities without verifying that the rumored allegations against them are even true, or refusing to forgive them, partially mend the negative connotations that the celeb holds in your mind, and give them time and grace to evolve (which I think I’m guilty of) when they may very well be willing and wanting to serve as an ally to marginalized communities, doesn’t productively serve the pursuit of social justice. Instead, cancel culture is very much a single-sided game, where people just condemn and talk at the people they are frustrated with. There appears to be little opportunity within cancel culture for constructive conversations to take place, especially where the “cancelled” person can, too, be involved. Thus, participating in cancel culture is perhaps self-fulfilling only. It’s format on social media is inherently millions of people against one, and therefore, the lack of that important two-way street communicates the message that it’s perfectly okay to alienate and shame individuals, or conversely, just cancel anyone and anything that you disagree with.

That’s also why we’ve started seeing politicians condemn cancel culture and use it as a guise to get away with bad things. If cancel culture starts to gain the reputation that it is totally toxic and just a way for people to express their hatred against anything or anyone they don’t happen to align with, then that, too, dampens its power.

So, ultimately, it is my view that cancel culture, in theory, really can be effective as a tool of social justice. We must just remember to be extra careful and vigilant not to fall into the trap of unwarranted bullying and blind bandwagon bashing when speaking out against problematic people.

Where do we go from here? tips for being a smart media consumer:

As tempting as it may be, try to refrain from jumping on the bandwagon once you hear a rumor or allegation against a celebrity, whether you like them or not. Conduct your own research, to the extent that you can, before believing everything you see arise on social media.
When speaking out against a problematic celebrity statement or act, try to do so in a constructive manner — including links to resources to help the communities affected, thought-provoking questions, and the ability to engage in a discussion with both like-minded and non-like-minded people.
It’s okay to not immediately accept an apology if you’re skeptical of its genuineness. Instead, continue to watch out for concrete steps that the celebrity may be taking to right their wrongs before granting them back your support.
Remember that for celebrities (and even more for influencers), we as consumers provide them with their platforms. In just the same way, we are capable of taking them away (which sounds kind-of ominous). But, really, think critically about who you are giving your support, monetarily, socially, etc., and revoke it if, at the end of the day, you feel that’s what’s right.
It’s easy to fall into the mindset of believing that you, as just one person, cannot meaningfully affect these major celebrities by refusing to watch their movie, buy their merchandise, keep their books on your shelf, or speak about their role in pop culture. But, as much as we’ve seen that cancel culture can be a really powerful source of collective action, it can also be personal. Even if you feel like you’re not truly making an impact in your reaction to a celebrity’s terrible behavior, I (for what it’s worth) think you should rest easy knowing that you’re choosing to respond to injustice or misconduct according to your own moral compass. And if masses of others choose to join you in that work along the way… even better.