no end in sight but what exactly is it we hung out in packs didn't we and i think everyone had to conform and if you didn't conform you were chucked out of the pack and you were probably more vulnerable to uh to predators but instead of roaming the plains of the sahara most people now find themselves browsing the feeds of social media so you fast forward hundreds of thousands of years and here we are using platforms where it's kind of similar so people want to conform want to be a majority in their belief system and if they're not or if they do something to almost threaten the pack by doing something stupid um or saying the wrong thing or being horrible to someone and people will ostracize to stop giving support to someone or something because of a perceived objectionable action or opinion is the general consensus of what cancel culture is but it's not something you can really slap a label on and call it a day because it's constantly evolving along with the online culture it's a part of there are cases where the freedom of social media has toppled powerful people and introduced some form of change or justice it's actually held people accountable but as it has become more normalized and a regular part of the social media experience it's lost its fundamental purpose cancel culture is almost entirely ineffective at having any sort of long lasting consequence or really just sort of any productive discussion around these ideas i think since NUMBER_TOKEN we have seen a particularly rapid change in what the majority perceives as acceptable ways of speaking and behaving emphasized online with how people react to certain issues now this ideal is enforced through mass outrage and targets literally anyone who does something to break the unwritten rules rather than look at a problem that is deep rooted and has consequences in people's real lives the phenomenon of online cancer culture is more so identifying fragments of offensive conduct that someone has exhibited online and then focusing a lot of outrage in order for those people to piggyback off of it and get a lot of positive engagement on social media for themselves but that doesn't actually result in necessarily any sort of real life consequence a lot of times the main twitter character of the day will just sort of disappear when they face a lot of online backlash and then nothing will really happen to them you know people have lost their jobs because of cancer culture people have lost stature and prominence because of cancer culture as we've sort of seen this cycle play out over and over again those things don't necessarily last a lot of times the consequences of cancer culture are pretty fleeting and unless it aligns with some sort of actual like judicial action or legislative action those things are less common than just having like this out this outpouring of outrage in essence those with power and influence remain untouchable yet again and the consequences really only come when non-online entities take an interest instead of being a way for people to come together and challenge the real issues in society it seems the culture has turned into its own sort of internet genre you've seen this phenomenon just grow and grow and grow because the people who are benefiting from it are oftentimes people who are forming online personalities around sort of governing these types of discourse and that is what they do to either boost their own individual engagement weighing in on the topic of the day weighing in on the villain of the day that's just a way that a lot of people have created their online personalities obviously there's a big problem when something
NO_SEGMENT_TOKEN