Introduction
While character assassination has taken a variety of forms throughout history, a current and particularly controversial practice of social ostracism has bred “cancel culture.”
Cancel culture refers to when a person, typically a public figure, is expelled from their social or professional circles as a result of offensive behavior, real or alleged. The expression is generally used by those who feel they are being unfairly punished for minor transgressions.
As a form of public shaming, those who are “canceled” may be scapegoated or stigmatized and exposed to the judgment and bullying of the public. Canceled individuals may, in perception or reality, find themselves silenced and unable to speak on their own behalf.
While cancel culture is often linked to the rise of social media, practices of silencing and social exclusion have many historical antecedents, ranging from public scapegoating rituals to rebellious mobs tearing down the statues of disgraced individuals.
CARP's third international conference on “Cancel Culture and Character Assassination" took place September 21-23, 2021. It attracted scholars from 13 countries focusing on the contemporary issues associated with cancel culture from a variety of disciplinary and cultural angles.
Executive Summary
- Character assassination (CA) theory is grounded in scholarly research that encompasses a diverse range of academic fields, including psychology, history, and rhetorical studies. The theory is constantly evolving, with new conceptual ideas provided by scholars of sociology, political science, communication, and conflict resolution. CA theory provides a conceptual framework to study cancel culture as a social phenomenon and a communication process.
- In the United States, the opinions on cancel culture are divided across partisan lines. Left-leaning Americans tend to view cancel culture as accountability, while those on the right are more likely to view cancel culture as punishment, censorship of speech and history, or an attack on traditional American values. These two camps are divided in five key areas: 1) whether cancelers are rushing to judge or trying to be helpful, 2) whether social media call-outs are productive, 3) the importance of free speech vs. creating a comfortable online environment, 4) the motivations that drive cancel culture, and 5) whether people should speak up when they encounter offensive content online.
- Historians trace the roots of cancel culture to ancient and medieval practices like ostracism, memory erasing, and witch hunts. Cancel culture is associated with contemporary public debates about controversial historical monuments. Researchers have found that political partisanship mediates attitudes towards canceling historical figures and removing their statues. These attitudes can be influenced by framing media effects. Facts, anecdotes, and personal information about historical figures affect public opinion regarding the future of controversial monuments.
- Scholars can encourage a broader societal discourse around historical figures that are not in line with contemporary moral values. They can create alternative ways to examine historical issues using burgeoning research on trauma and public memory. Researchers can open a new line of study into the actual operations of cancel culture and its social dynamics. Cross-cultural research can identify in which societies cancel culture is likely to thrive.
- Research on cancel culture has implications for institutional policy. Canceling is used to silence dissenters, gain institutional control, and maintain existing institutional hierarchies. The need to shame and stigmatize individual targets spurs the search for scapegoats. However, canceling as a punitive measure fails to enforce accountability because it denies targets opportunities for corrective actions and forgiveness. Moreover, it prevents necessary reflection and the chance to learn from mistakes. Thus, cancel culture is contrary to democratic values rooted in open-mindedness and freedom of thought.
- Cancellation rhetoric has become a popular rhetorical tool in political communication. This rhetoric is increasingly used by governments as part of information warfare between foreign nations. Politicians and diplomats discredit other nations in the same way they defame domestic political rivals. International attempts to cancel rogue countries risk conditioning them to act in ways that threaten world peace. In some societies, politicians frame cancel culture as a new threat to traditionalist values to unite their constituents around a national ideology.
- Social media amplifies cancel culture’s effects, encouraging simplistic content, provocative behavior, and moral outrage. Active publics often perceive canceling as entertainment, performance, and competition. They use public call-outs as opportunities to demonstrate their rhetorical skills. This contest of mockery and shaming often prevents the creation of real solutions to critical systemic issues. Late-night comedy shows contribute to political bias by selectively ridiculing some politicians while ignoring the shortcomings of others.
- Artificial intelligence expands the scope and outreach of disinformation campaigns using deepfakes. Malicious actors use synthetic media to deceive publics and destroy reputations. Due to the novelty of deepfakes, the general public remains largely unaware of the reputation threats they pose. A lack of reliable detection software impedes prevention management.
December 12, 2022