Bang! The gavel hits the podium at an ear piercing volume, resonating throughout the courtroom, “Court is now in session”. You look up to the stand but to your surprise, there isn’t just one judge sitting before you. Rather, over hundreds of thousands of them are sitting and lining out the courtroom door, all ready to place their own sentence for the “crime” you committed. Remember that post you put up a few years ago… yeah, that one. Turns out that someone found it and it resurfaced breaking the internet. Many people claim that what you said was outrageous and a crime against humanity, but all you did was post about supporting a certain political candidate using a strong choice of words. Now while many deemed it as inappropriate, nothing you said was breaking the law, but people took it upon themselves to act as the judge. Turns out, you’ve just been CANCELED.
Cancel Culture refers to the practice of collectively “canceling” or boycotting a public figure, company, or individual for actions or statements that others deem as offensive, harmful, or socially unacceptable. It is a more recent phenomenon that began during the last decade, especially prevalent during the previous Presidency of Donald Trump. Some may state that cancel culture is necessary, almost a natural checks and balances system but for social media. Is this really productive towards open dialogue or is it just the unjust treatment and alienation of individuals expressing their first amendment rights?
Cancel culture plays a role in the limitation of our first amendment rights. Now while it may have a profound impact, it doesn’t necessarily mean that just because cancel culture is a thing, we can’t speak as we please or display creative expression. But, it sure does catalyze the responses and negative outcomes that may come. For example, Mia. Mia was the original mascot for the well known butter brand Land O’Lakes. Many people criticized the way she was portrayed on the packaging, stating that the “Land O'Lakes image of Mia went ‘hand-in-hand with human and sex trafficking of our women and girls … by depicting Native women as sex objects”’ (ND Representative Ruth Buffalo (D)). Some even said that the way in which she was depicted was deemed as cultural appropriation and stereotyping of Native American culture. This led to a boycott causing Land O’Lakes market share and revenue to drop drastically, resulting in them removing Mia’s image from the brand. Turns out, the canceling of Mia was actually not doing any good. Rather some may argue it was a huge mistake motivated by emotions, the illusion of morality, and misunderstanding rather than logic and explanation. The artist who designed the image was a known Native American artist, Patrick DesJarlait, whose identity was rooted in the populous culture of the Objibwe tribe. He designed Mia with the intent of depicting true culture, making sure details aligned with that of the real native tribes. Despite his efforts, individuals who felt they had the upper hand of morality decided they didn’t think it was right. This led to the silencing of Patrick DesJarlait and his culture, not to mention his right to free expression which leads into my next point.
Cancel culture on social media leads to an environment of silencing and closed discourse. Many people now suppress their thoughts and feelings simply out of fear that they may say something that deems them as cancel worthy. It doesn’t even need to be an extreme form of speech. Now, going against the grain is also worthy of being canceled. This leads to an extremely unhealthy environment in which the masses or those with the loudest voices control the narratives rather than everyone being able to have a voice. The present dynamic leads to the suppression of diversity of thought and discourages real and productive discussions. While we should be fostering accountability and growth, cancel culture often leaves zero room for understanding or reconciliation, like with Land O’Lakes. While it is important to address harmful speech and behavior, the current climate often lacks empathy and nuance, replacing constructive criticism with public shaming. We need to prioritize open dialogue, give space for differing opinions, and allow people the opportunity to learn and grow from their mistakes, rather than silencing them entirely.
Despite the present challenges, it is also important to recognize that cancel culture, when used appropriately and with strong backing knowledge can positively impact society. One case present today involves Sean Combs, A.K.A. Diddy. He has arisen back into the spotlight for allegations of “sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy, and transportation to engage in prostitution” (CBS 2024). Those who used to support him like Hulu, Empower Global Business Partners, Peloton, Howard University, Salxco (Sean Combs manager), and many fans have all decided to take a step back and drop their support for him, ultimately canceling him. In this case, cancel culture has played an important role in holding him, a high-profile figure, accountable for his horrific actions. Cancel culture has helped to empower individuals and organizations to take a stand against harmful behavior and to send a message that conduct of this manner will not be tolerated. This results in the creation of a positive societal impact by reinforcing the importance of accountability and justice, not limited to just this example. Famous musician Lizzo, as well as Ellen Degeneres have also fallen to cancel culture for allegations of sexual harassment and hostile work environments.
In conclusion, much like a courtroom, cancel culture feels like being judged by masses of faceless judges, where the sentence is passed before even making a plea. This environment of silencing and public shaming creates a space where people are fearful to speak their minds. Fearing repercussions and being deemed inappropriately by the masses or those with the loudest voices. However, as a courtroom aims for justice, cancel culture aims to do the same. It has the potential to serve a similar role when used properly. As with any judgment process, it needs to be seeded with fairness, empathy, and opportunities for growth. If we can move toward a more balanced approach, cancel culture can shift from being a weapon to a mechanism for justice. This will lead to the fostering of a society where accountability is coupled with understanding and the chance for redemption if redeemable. So before you go and bang your gavel, make sure you at least listen to the plea. Bang! Court is Adjourned.
Cristian Anaya, a student in Jon Pfeiffer’s media law class at Pepperdine University, wrote the above essay in response to the following prompt: “The Rise of Cancel Culture: Discuss the phenomenon of cancel culture on social media, its implications for public discourse, and its long-term effects on society.” Cristian is an Advertising major, with a Concentration in Marketing.
Contact Jon and his team today.
