Disclaimer: The comments and opinions in this article do not reflect the opinions or policies of Total Apex or its owners. The content matter is the subjective opinion of the author.
Cancel culture has become one of the most fascinating practices in society. It is basically a process where people, usually celebrities or public figures, face quick and harsh consequences for comments or actions that have been made, whether current or in the past. This response can be especially concerning when one considers the current state of misinformation being presented as fact. Given this dynamic, a balance between accountability and redemption is needed.
Some individuals see this as a tool that can be used to force accountability onto people. It is seen as a way of making sure that harmful behaviors and thoughts do not go unchecked or unrecognized by the majority of folks. Other people see it as a dangerous response, which suppresses free speech and punishes people without providing them with fair judgment. So, which is it? Is cancel culture needed to hold people accountable for their actions, or is it morphing into an area that threatens the freedom to express oneself in a safe way?
Supporter Standpoint
Supporters of cancel culture reason that it has created a needed system of accountability in an age where public figures can exert tremendous influence over groups of people. In the past, those with power, whether actors, politicians, or corporate executives, often faced little to no consequence for offensive or negative actions. Cancel culture has changed that. Crusades like #MeToo and Black Lives Matter have shown that the public is willing to hold influential people accountable for their actions. This willingness is especially true when they involve issues like sexual wrongdoing, bigotry, or homophobia.
For many individuals, cancel culture is a way for marginalized statuses to reclaim authority. In spaces where standard justice systems have failed or ignored victims, social media allows those voices to be heard. It is a form of democratic power where shared opinion can drive change. For example, companies distancing themselves from offensive figures or movements being altered because of public backlash illustrates the tangible effects of collective action.
What the Opposition Has to Say
However, cancel culture also has a downside that must be considered. It is a darker side that presents concerns about free speech and the urgency with which society rushes to judge people. Often, individuals are “canceled” based on one disturbing statement or action without considering the broader context or allowing room for growth and change. In some cases, people are judged for blunders made years or even decades ago. While accountability is certainly important, a question arises from this type of practice. Should someone be defined permanently by a past mistake?
This setting can create a chilling effect. It is one where people fear voicing opinions that might not line up with the majority. It is undoubtedly dangerous when the public stance becomes more about silencing disagreement than engaging in meaningful discussion. If we create a culture where any unpopular or controversial opinion can lead to social ostracism, we risk limiting the range of acceptable beliefs and debates.
A Middle Ground is Needed
The best approach might be to find a balance between accountability and forgiveness. Instead of jumping straight to “canceling” someone, perhaps people as a whole should focus more on enlightening and encouraging development. The goal should probably not be to banish people from society forever without the opportunity to respond. Rather, it should be to allow for change and conversation. Genuine accountability is not about punishment for punishment’s sake. Rather, it is about creating space for contemplation and, where possible, redemption.
Some Final Thoughts
Cancel culture may have its values when used thoughtfully. It has delivered power to the powerless, specifically to those whose voices have been notoriously ignored in the past. Yet, when used too carelessly, it risks becoming a tool for mob justice, sacrificing free speech for the sake of wrath. As a collective, we only need to ask ourselves a single question. Do we want to live in a world where people can change, or are we more interested in casting judgment on the people whose opinions may differ from our own? The answer to that question will, without a doubt, shape the future of both cancel culture and free speech.
