Cancel culture has gained significant traction in recent years. As simple as it sounds, cancel culture is a subject of duality —  a complicated phenomenon rather than a black-and-white issue.

Proponents of cancel culture stand firm on the idea that being canceled provides accountability in situations where traditional institutions may fail to do so. 

Platforms like X and Instagram have been used to amplify the marginalized, like the #MeToo movement, which urged for conduct reformation in the entertainment industry. Social justice movements like Black Lives Matter and #SayHerName are other examples of movements that called for change and sought to leverage momentum into accountability during highly publicized injustices. 

These movements and other similar ones have given ordinary people the power to not only spread awareness but also call out public figures, corporations or even peers for their complicity in sexism, racism or other forms of discrimination. It is no secret that those with wealth, fame or power have escaped accountability for such actions.

In this sense, cancel culture can be a form of activism by efficiently disrupting prejudicial and inequitable dynamics.

However, this same promotion of “calling out” others for certain actions and ideas can quickly turn into public shaming and ridicule. 

It is one thing to let someone know they are wrong, and it is another to entirely and unnecessarily bash someone over a subjective matter. That brings us to the question: What is subjective and what is not? 

In today’s world, it is sometimes hard to define the line between the two. Are we canceling someone because of their unethical behavior or because we disagree with what they said?

This is the flaw within the cancel culture. A lack of nuance can lead to disproportionate and excessive shaming, often created without proper context or even consideration of growth.

People tend to forget that these same celebrities and influencers to whom we give power and put on these pedestals are still human. When humans make mistakes, we typically are taught that you live, learn and grow as you go. However, once someone of status is canceled, there is almost no room for growth or redemption.

This fosters an environment in which people are forever defined by their worst moments, preventing future positive contributions to society; I do not believe that is how it should always be.

As quickly as we are to give people these platforms, we are even quicker to remove them when they no longer fit the image we have created for them. Some influencers did not ask for the audience and platform they were given and feel they should not have to obstruct or water down their opinions or interactions to please everyone, which is fair. The truth is that you cannot please everyone. How can we expect them to shape their identity for us when we know we would not in our own normal lives?

On the other hand, you could say that because they have been gifted with such a supportive base, they should respect it and keep that in mind when they step into a room. They are not called “influencers” for nothing.

Many celebrities have lost their careers for misunderstood comments or misdirected hate.

Stifling free speech and open dialogue — in addition to the fear of being canceled — can deter people from sharing controversial opinions or engaging in honest discussions on complex issues.

This leads to an overly cautious society, limiting intellectual growth and an exchange of ideas. 

Moreover, the overall flaw of cancel culture is its inconsistent application. Not all individuals are canceled equally, and it becomes very selective about when it is okay to point the finger.

So is it really a proper approach if it is not applied equally?

Not to mention the rushed judgment that can occur with how fast things spread online today when emotions sometimes outweigh facts.

Public opinion is fickle; what is considered offensive today may not be seen the same way in the future. It can boil down to personal feelings rather than moral standards.

Cancel culture has reshaped the cultural landscape, and its complexities raise important questions about accountability, justice and forgiveness. Balance is needed within this intersection to develop a fair and just society.

Chequoia Adderley is a senior integrated marketing and communications major from Pascagoula, Miss.