Dana Cetojevic

In this critical response, I will outline the impact ‘Cancel Culture’ has on ‘Freedom of Speech’. The purpose of this response will outline the negative and positive attributes of ‘cancel culture’. I will also establish my academic perspective upon the factual understanding of this topic. The world of media has thus seen many uproars of movements, and the development of digital politics and social acceptance has constantly been progressing throughout the existence of new age media. The constant evolution of ‘Social Media’ has supported the construction of identities and profiles.

Social media platforms have adapted well to the censorship of prejudice publications. However, the implementation of user expression towards publications from targeted profiles can perpetuate major discretion within cultural communities. From my observation regarding publications on social platforms, I would propose my view that the setting of social media can be seen as quite inflammatory. What I mean by this, is that certain topics/events or topics that integrate with events can impose a sensitive ramification for viewers and individuals. I would even go as far to consider individual’s/users’ political and ethical views are unconditionally exercised and can generate the notion of “Cancel Culture” and the ‘cancelation’ of a profile. (Velasco, J., 2020.) “Social media has become a powerful force in contemporary life, paving the way for the rise of digital participatory cultures and social movements” As human beings, naturally, when we see our values and belief system challenged, we are naturally inclined to counterattack and silence the one we see fit as the perpetrator. Furthermore, whenever an individual shares/posts or publicises contextual material/content, it is entering a very ‘high alert’ zone.

The intention of ‘speech’ is to be heard, the concept of ‘freedom of speech’ “the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion”. Cancel culture could somewhat be described as a movement/notion that people on social media who publish controversial or what may be considered offensive, should be silenced or “cancelled” by a large group of people or community. . (Velasco, J., 2020.) “Those who were cancelled have breached the line of social acceptability, according to the unmarked and entirely ambiguous norm of today’s social media climate”. The impact of being “cancelled” could entail a number of things for the profile, such as boycotting works, if the subject is a celebrity or high profiled influencer, it could mean, mass petitioning for their employer to fire them, or to even petition the social media platform/company to ban their account. Beyond simply disagreeing with the person or convincing people that they are wrong, Cancellers seek to go above their head and use power to silence them directly.

My response to this is that this removes people with such views from the online discourse, as well as incentivizes other people with such views to remain silent lest they also be cancelled. (McGarvey Hidy, K., 2022.) “Freedom of speech and freedom of thought promote self-expression and an individual’s exercise of her conscience rights. A free society rejects enforced conformism that annihilates individual expression and dissent”. Proponents of cancel culture believe that, by only targeting people with hateful/racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic views, they can reduce the amount of hate on the internet, and the only victims will be racists/sexists/homophobes/transphobes, so it’s a win/win.

English broadcaster, journalist, writer, and television personality, ‘Piers Morgan’ is highly known to continually demonstrate controversial conservative opinions on highly regarded topics. His most renowned contreversiol live broadcast regarding the Interview between ‘Oprah Winfrey’ and ‘Meghan Markle’, Markle claiming that her requests to ‘Buckingham Palace officials’ for help were rejected. Morgan addressed the Interview with contentious commentary. A total of 41,015 complaints were made to media watchdog Ofcom after Morgan’s programme aired. The outcome of this response led to the “cancellation” and departure of Morgan’s position on ITV’s ‘Good Morning Britain’ show. And exceeding backlash on his career. Contrary to beliefs, Piers Morgan may exhibit controversy to liberal ideologies. However his angle to commentary in the public eye is deemed accurate to many conservative viewers. Opponents of cancelling culture believe that freedom of speech is sufficiently important. Ideas should be engaged with directly, and silencing people doesn’t actually help anyone, it just drives hateful ideas underground. Additionally, they believe cancel culture is incredibly easily abused, since the criteria for being cancelled is not any objective criteria for hatefulness, but simply the ability to convince a sufficiently large mob that this particular target is worth being cancelled, which depends not merely on the hatefulness of their views/posts, but also on their overall reputation among mob-leaders.

To conclude this response on Cancel Culture’s impact on Freedom of Speech, I would state that “cancel culture” acts as a form of censorship. In my belief, censorship ultimately demises the act of ‘Free Speech’. Social views between conservative and liberal ideologies both exhibit conflicting inclinations however an individual’s acquired belief system is ultimately an inevitable practice. The ‘Cancel Culture’ movement places a challenging notion on the void of reasoning and freedom of expression without fear of retaliation and censorship. I believe that cancel culture is a political weapon, you only get cancelled if you have the wrong politics. “Cancel culture” has a problem with not allowing people to make human errors. I will also add that We also need to understand that our culture has moved at a rate never before seen because of the internet and new age of media. These big cultural revolutions take time to cement and we can’t hold people to such high standards to an old culture. Times are moving faster than most people can account for.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson-Lopez, J., Lambert, R. and Budaj, A., 2021. Tug of War: Social Media, Cancel Culture, and Diversity for Girls and The 100. KOME, 9(1), pp.64-84.

Ng, E., 2020. No Grand Pronouncements Here…: Reflections on Cancel Culture and Digital Media Participation. Television & New Media, 21(6), pp.621-627.

http://www.dictionary.com. 2022. Definition of freedom of speech | Dictionary.com. [online] Available at: <https://www.dictionary.com/browse/freedom-of-speech&gt; [Accessed 1 April 2022].

• “The right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion”.

Velasco, J., 2020. You are Cancelled: Virtual Collective Consciousness and the Emergence of Cancel Culture as Ideological Purging. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 12(5).

• “Social media has become a powerful force in contemporary life, paving the way for the rise of digital participatory cultures and social movements”

• “Those who were cancelled have breached the line of social acceptability, according to the unmarked and entirely ambiguous norm of today’s social media climate”

McGarvey Hidy, K., 2022. Washburn Law Journal, Volume 61, no. 1 (Fall 2021), Table of Contents. [online] Washburn University School of Law. Available at: <https://www.washburnlaw.edu/publications/wlj/issues/61-1.html&gt; [Accessed 2 March 2022].

Nelson, A., 2022. Over 41,000 people have complained to Ofcom about Piers Morgan – here’s what that means. [online] Yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk. Available at: <https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/read-this/over-41000-people-have-complained-to-ofcom-abou t-piers-morgan-heres-what-that-means-3160968> [Accessed 2 April 2022].