It is almost impossible to have any kind of sociopolitical conversation on the Internet without the topic of cancel culture being raised at some point.
Cancel culture is referred to on Wikipedia as 'a cultural phenomenon in which some who are deemed to have acted or spoken in an unacceptable manner are ostracized (sic), boycotted, or shunned. This shunning may extend to social or professional circles—whether on social media or in person—with most high-profile incidents involving celebrities. Those subject to this ostracism are said to have been "canceled" (sic).
I listen to a lot of opinions on this and I often find myself in the quite strange position of not actually agreeing with anyone, so I want to summarise exactly what my position is on this. The first thing is that I have to say what the three most common opinions on this actually are, which is as follows:
1. The view that no one, no matter how toxic their opinion is, should ever have an invitation to speak rescinded because of their unpopularity (This is normally expressed by the right, and originated in relation to certain speakers being de-platformed by student unions, but I've heard it extended to everything, even unfollows on social media);
2. The view that rescinding invitations to people who have expressed harmful viewpoints is generally a good thing, or even better not inviting them to speak in the first place (this is normally expressed by the left);
3. The viewpoint that cancel culture is a complete myth and doesn't happen, because the people involved normally have platforms that are too big to effectively cancel (this is a more neutral one, but I've seen it more from the left than from the right).
--
Of these three viewpoints, the one that is the closest to my opinion is the third one. I used to be that person arguing that cancel culture doesn't exist, because the likes of Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage are so connected and have such big platforms to reach people that rescinding an invitation to speak somewhere won't cancel them at all. I still believe this - however, this does not mean that cancel culture does not exist. It definitely exists - moreover, it exists in a way which is not what people normally mean when they use the phrase 'cancel culture', and in a way which is intensely damaging. Saying that it doesn't exist doesn't help to acknowledge this.
I remember the exact moment that I realised what cancel culture really is, and that it's such a serious matter. I was watching this interview between the journalist Louis Theroux and the comedian Katherine Ryan. He asks her about cancel culture about fifteen minutes into it, and if you can really be cancelled. Ryan responds, 'You can if you accuse too many men of sexual assault', and discusses an interaction she'd had on a panel show with a well-known person, in which she implied information she was aware of of this person's concerning activities. Her comments had been cut from the broadcast. She doesn't name the person in the interview, but it's now widely believed that she was referring to Russell Brand.
Accusing people of sexual assault is not something that is commonly understood to be the kind of thing that gets you cancelled - if anything, it's understood that being accused of sexual assault without having been found guilty is what gets you cancelled, along with anything viewed as being 'not woke enough'. But Katherine Ryan's experience, and also my own experiences of the entertainment industry and understanding of the world more generally, have taught me that cancel culture is not something that is done by students or members of the public. It's done by media owners and PR people, in boardrooms, when someone is too much of a challenge to the establishment status quo.
The nature of cancel culture is such that although we can know it exists, we can't know for certain of any actual instances of it - the whole purpose is that it's done so quietly that it's not particularly noticeable. Usually, not even the person who's been cancelled knows about it - they just quietly find that they're finding it harder to express themselves to large groups of people than they used to be. So I have to make clear that any examples I could give on this blog would only be speculation; I'm not certain, and if the person I'm going to refer to believes themselves not to be a victim of cancel culture, they are welcome to contact me and correct the record and I'll give them a full and public apology. But the person I suspect has been a victim of cancel culture is the Irish author Sally Rooney. A few years ago, she was hailed as the voice of a generation, although she herself rejected this; her first two novels were adapted for screen to huge success, and her quirky and gently probing prose was considered indicative of the sociopolitical views of people in their teens and twenties. I used to see her work all over the place, both in the media and in bookshops. But shortly following the release of her third book, the amount of media exposure she was getting abruptly reduced. I'd barely see her in the media anymore and her books would stop appearing on the tables in bookshops. And I wonder if this is connected to the fact that she very publicly refused to allow her third book to be taken on by an Israeli publisher, in support of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions movement. It really wouldn't surprise me if this was too radical for the establishment status quo, and that they starved her of attention from this point onwards. As I said before, I do not know this for certain. It's entirely possible that Sally Rooney decided for herself to reduce the amount of media she was publicly engaging in, and if that's the case I apologise to her. However, if she isn't an instance of it, there'll be someone else in similar circumstances who has been.
Harvey Weinstein, Jimmy Savile and other people who behaved extremely inappropriately because of their power were not always successful in intimidating their victims into staying quiet. There were people who spoke out about it at the time, and their voices were suppressed. This was cancel culture. There were brave journalists who tried to report these things, and their publications refused to print it. Nowadays, this comes in the form of social media shadow banning (not banned in any official sense, but merely the algorithm preventing someone's posts from showing up in feeds so you have to actually look for them). Someone in the group I'm part of, OCISA, suggested earlier this week that OCISA may have been shadow banned as they've stopped seeing their posts - the admin was unsure, as you don't get told. All of my most recent blogs have been taken down by Facebook in the interests of 'cyber security' - this makes no sense to me. If they argued that I was spamming, or self-promoting too hard, I'd think that a reasonable complaint even if it was annoying, but I don't think anyone who has actually read my blogs could argue that there are any security issues with them. My reports to Facebook have not been heeded at all. You could argue that this is me being cancelled.
In terms of unfollowing people on social media you don't like, or rescinding invitations to speak, I really don't have an opinion on this. I don't generally think it's a good idea to only listen to opinions from people you agree with, I'd always encourage open conversation and sometimes that includes quite difficult conversations. But I don't think there's anyone who wouldn't have a limit in who or what they're prepared to listen to, and the line is a very individual and personal thing. In each particular case, I tend to think that it's got absolutely nothing to do with me and is a matter for the individuals involved. And, it remains the truth that they've very rarely been cancelled. If an invitation has been rescinded because someone is so unpopular with the general public, they're probably someone with a very big platform that can't be cancelled. I'm hearing a lot at the moment about JK Rowling being cancelled because of her views on trans rights, and I always say, 'No, she hasn't been. JK Rowling is too rich and famous to cancel, she'll always be known and be capable of reaching an audience.' But most people are possible to cancel, and throughout our lifetime, many of us will be if we annoy someone powerful. And guess what? We won't even know it's happening.
No comments:
Post a Comment