In defence of ‘cancel culture’.
By: Ellie Masterman
Tags: Andrew Sabisky, Cancel Culture, News Media

This week, in The Spectator, Isobel Hardman asked, ‘Is Andrew Sabisky an example of cancel culture?’. This short phrase is the name given to waves of public hostility online, directed at high-profile figures, in response to something offensive they have said or done. News outlets report on this response and the person is considered ‘cancelled’: losing their job perhaps, or tarnishing their public reputation. For Hardman, it is ‘where freedom of speech is trampled by hordes baying for yet another resignation’ (Hardman, 2020). Yet, Sabisky, it must be said, openly advocates for eugenics. Until his resignation last week, he also occupied a fairly influential position in the British government. Is he not worthy of cancellation? In this blog post, I will argue against Hardman that so-called ‘cancel culture’ is actually an excellent thing for free speech — and doesn’t work nearly often enough.

The basis of opposition to cancel culture is that justice should be determined by juries, not an online ‘mob’. ‘Mob’ is a favourite word among cancel critics — Douglas Murray uses it no less than four times in this article — implying that those expressing outrage are an animalised mass of uneducated idiots, who subsist on celebrity schadenfreude. It’s little surprise that this article came from an Old Etonian, as this completely mirrors the upper classes’ reaction in the early 20th century to an increasingly literate working class (Carey, 2002). In a similar information revolution, social media has granted access to public discourse to those historically barred from it — such as the working class and ethnic minorities (Hagi, 2019). Thus, the word ‘mob’ actually reveals an elite fear of a more democratic representation of public opinion.

Commentators also claim that ‘cancel culture’ doesn’t allow room for learning (Silverman, 2019). This is certainly true, but in practice should be treated with some scepticism. Edwin Battistella writes that celebrity apologies tend to apologise that responders are upset, suggesting that they do not even recognise that they have done something wrong (Battistella, 2014, cited in Ibrahim, 2019). Further, these high-profile celebrities show few signs of trying to learn: Lena Dunham has made so many apologies over her career that a Twitter account exists for the sole purpose of satirising them.

Yet, if Dunham’s career continues regardless, it begs the question: what does cancel culture actually cancel? Johnny Depp, Laurence Fox and Mel Gibson are among those who have fallen victim to the mob, their careers and reputations in tatters… oh, except that’s not the case. Professionally, these men have received few consequences. As Shamira Ibrahim states, ‘One doesn’t need to look any further than Mel Gibson’s nomination for Best Director and attendance at the 2017 Academy Awards, years after his leaked anti-Semitic rant during a 2006 DUI arrest and subsequent abusive and racist voicemail to his ex-girlfriend, as proof positive of this fact’ (Ibrahim, 2019). Even Harvey Weinstein, a name almost synonymous with sexual assault following the #MeToo movement, felt sufficiently confident to turn up to a young artists’ comedy gig last year, and it was the two women who confronted him, not Weinstein himself, who were asked to leave (Hagi, 2019). Is it the cancelling ‘mob’, then, who hold power? Or is it those mourning their lack of free speech, unironically, in huge national newspapers?

In conclusion, what is termed ‘cancel culture’ is actually just ‘facing consequences for your actions’. The elite, who have always held sway over public opinion from their positions at the major, traditional news outlets, are simply not used to being publicly criticised for their actions. Further, nine times out of ten, such criticism doesn’t ‘cancel’ them at all. In fact, as Hagi suggests, it is usually the victims themselves who receive barrages of abuse about ‘cancel culture’; it is their free speech that is attacked. It is of course important that people should have the chance to learn. But if these ‘cancelled’ figures really want to, they now have ample free time in which to do so.

Bibliography

Battistella, E. L. (2014) Sorry About That: The Language of Public Apology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carey, J. (2002) The Intellectuals and the Masses: Pride and Prejudice Among the Literary Intelligentsia, 1880–1939. Chicago: Academy Chicago.

Express (2020) ‘Laurence Fox blasts vile “woke religion” and free speech “cancel culture” pervading UK’, 18thFebruary. Available: https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1243909/Laurence-Fox-latest-news-cancel-culture-woke-religion (Accessed 21st February 2020).

Hagi, S. (2019). ‘Cancel Culture is Not Real — At Least Not in the Way People Think’, 21st November, TIME. Available: https://time.com/5735403/cancel-culture-is-not-real/ (Accessed 21st February 2020).

Hardman, I. (2020) ‘Is Andrew Sabisky an example of cancel culture?’ 17th February, Spectator. Available: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/02/is-andrew-sabisky-an-example-of-cancel-culture/ (Accessed 21st February 2020).

Ibrahim, S. (2019). ‘In Defense of Cancel Culture’ 4th April, VICE. Available: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vbw9pa/what-is-cancel-culture-twitter-extremely-online (Accessed 21st February 2020).

Murray, D. (2020) ‘How to fight back against cancel culture’, 25th January, Spectator. Available: https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/01/how-to-fight-back-against-cancel-culture/ (Accessed: 21st February 2020).

Silverman, S. (2019) Sarah Silverman on “Funny” in 2019, Cancel Culture, ‘Big Mouth,’ Death Threats, the 2020 Election and ‘Big Little Lies’ [Podcast]. 9th August. Available at: https://play.acast.com/s/billsimmons/gid%3A%2F%2Fart19-episode-locator%2FV0%2Fbvxnk896TJ2hYoXEho3krF_v1B98X7zeb4zGgMwoT3M (Accessed: 21st February 2020).