Cancel culture IRL

[dudalb]

And Bafferts use of the Cancel Culture excuse is just plain pathetic.

 

[dudalb]

because their intentions are bad

It's possible to do bad things with good intentions. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

 

[catsmate]

After the winning house in the Kentucky Derby tested positive for a prohibited level of a performance-enhancing drug and is facing disqualification, the trainer (Bob Baffert) goes on Fox News and blames "cancel culture". Baffert has a record of more than thirty previous doping incidents.
It seems that "cancel culture" is the new whine-du-jour for conservatives and rightists caught out in misconduct.

 

[dudalb]

After the winning house in the Kentucky Derby tested positive for a prohibited level of a performance-enhancing drug and is facing disqualification, the trainer (Bob Baffert) goes on Fox News and blames "cancel culture". Baffert has a record of more than thirty previous doping incidents.
It seems that "cancel culture" is the new whine-du-jour for conservatives and rightists caught out in misconduct.

Baffert:another Trump supporter who Trump threw to the wolved when it became inconvient for Trump.
I am sure some people who have no Political Convictions, will use the Cancel Culture routine to try to get off the hook, though.

 

[d4m10n]

I am still failing to see how Gamergate and the Sacco firing/rehiring are at all closely related.

Okay, bit of a side track here. I'll put a pin in it.

Which post includes "hand-waving the entire thing away as cancel culture" upthread?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Okay, bit of a side track here. I'll put a pin in it.

Which post includes "hand-waving the entire thing away as cancel culture" upthread?

Any of your posts that conflate these disparate incidents of "cancelling". My point remains that most of these incidents do not have that much in common and linking them together as "cancel culture" is trying to force a square peg in a round hole and has become increasingly clear is mostly a culture war ploy by reactionaries.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Hating "Cancel Culture" does always seem to boil down to "Moral relativism for me, moral absolutism for you."

"When you're wrong, you're wrong. When I'm wrong STOP EVERYTHING AND HAVE A DEEP NEVER ENDING INFINITE HAIRPSLIT PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION ABOUT THE VERY CONCEPT OF WRONG, WHO GETS TO DEFINE IT, AND EVERY POSSIBLE PARALLEL DISCUSSION!"

This reminds me of some bad relationships I've been in...

 

[d4m10n]

Any of your posts that conflate these disparate incidents of "cancelling".

Which one was hand-waving the entire phenomenon, though? I generally try to link specific actions (e.g. calling for firing someone) to specific consequences for specific individuals (e.g. Sacco, Richards). I don't think you're giving that approach a fair shake here, even though you claim it's okay at #2955.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Any of your posts that conflate these disparate incidents of "cancelling". My point remains that most of these incidents do not have that much in common and linking them together as "cancel culture" is trying to force a square peg in a round hole and has become increasingly clear is mostly a culture war ploy by reactionaries.

"None of these incidents have very much in common, they're all distinct and unique situations, and we should consider each of these events in isolation. We need to be careful not to lump them all together as if there's some underlying pattern of behavior"

-Racist backing the blue, probably

 

[dirtywick]

It's possible to do bad things with good intentions. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

Yes, which I think makes the actions more understandable and excusable than doing them with bad intentions.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Okay, bit of a side track here. I'll put a pin in it.

Which post includes "hand-waving the entire thing away as cancel culture" upthread?

It's not a side track, I think it's very telling that you conflate all these issues into the same phenomena.

 

[d4m10n]

It's not a side track, I think it's very telling that you conflate all these issues into the same phenomena.

Whenever I see something that fits the common definition, I use the common phrase. So far no one has suggested an alternative phrase for the performance of group shaming on social media designed to induce withdrawal of support from a public figure who has committed some transgression.

Once again, though, I have to ask in which post I handwaved away the entire phenomenon instead of addressing specific instances. I'm afraid you may have me confused with someone else here, or perhaps with Fox News.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Whenever I see something that fits the common definition, I use the common phrase. So far no one has suggested an alternative phrase for the performance of group shaming on social media designed to induce withdrawal of support from a public figure who has committed some transgression.

Once again, though, I have to ask in which post I handwaved away the entire phenomenon instead of addressing specific instances. I'm afraid you may have me confused with someone else here, or perhaps with Fox News.

Seems odd to coin a new phrase to describe the very basic foundation of society, that people might expect good behavior from others and withdraw support from those that fail to do so.

The entire framing of "cancel culture" as a new phenomena is begging the question. There is less space between your measured definition and Fox News hysterics than you let on. It is an inherently reactionary stance that purports, without any real evidence, that modern culture has become increasingly censorious and punitive compared to the golden era of yesteryear.

 

[d4m10n]

Seems odd to coin a new phrase to describe the very basic foundation of society, that people might expect good behavior from others and withdraw support from those that fail to do so.

You've left off the bits that are actually new, even though I just typed them out above. Why?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You've left off the bits that are actually new, even though I just typed them out above. Why?

So what, every preexisting social phenomena that has already existed is now a new phenomena because the internet exists?

Public shaming, be it online or via tabloids or letters to the editor or late night TV or whatever has always existed.

 

[d4m10n]

So what, every preexisting social phenomena that has already existed is now a new phenomena because the internet exists?

So far as I can tell, only a handful of preexisting social phenomena have received a new coinage as a result of how massive connectivity has significantly changed the way we relate to one another. I happen to think this particular coinage is handy, because no other phrase compactly describes the process of social shaming plus social media, which enables countless people who've never previously heard of someone (e.g. Kroger Andy) to call for their immediate punishment.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

So far as I can tell, only a handful of preexisting social phenomena have received a new coinage as a result of how massive connectivity has significantly changed the way we relate to one another. I happen to think this particular coinage is handy, because no other phrase compactly describes the process of social shaming plus social media, which enables countless people who've never previously heard of someone (e.g. Kroger Andy) to call for their immediate punishment.

Yes, lots of people are very upset that new media is increasingly decentralized and that the traditional gatekeepers have less and less power to direct discourse. It was much easier to evade consequences for bad actions back when there were fewer and more powerful gatekeepers of public dialogue.

There's probably an interesting conversation to be had about the decentralizing impact the internet has had on public discourse and more broadly on human society, but I can't see how such an obviously bad-faith framing like "cancel culture" is going to be a productive foundation for that.

Keep linking to your dictionary.com definition while reactionary freaks howl at the moon about cancel culture. Congrats on being the one true defender of the real definition.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Yes, lots of people are very upset that new media is increasingly decentralized and that the traditional gatekeepers have less and less power to direct discourse. It was much easier to evade consequences for bad actions back when there were fewer and more powerful gatekeepers of public dialogue.

There's probably an interesting conversation to be had about the decentralizing impact the internet has had on public discourse and more broadly on human society, but I can't see how such an obviously bad-faith framing like "cancel culture" is going to be a productive foundation for that.

Keep linking to your dictionary.com definition while reactionary freaks howl at the moon about cancel culture. Congrats on being the one true defender of the real definition.

But what about true victims of Cancel Culture like Bill O'Reilly? It was common knowledge that he sexually harassed his employees see the lawsuit from 2006 where he was recorded wanting to rum falafel all over his assistant in the shower. Nothing came of it because that was before cancel culture. Then he has another settlement for sexual harassment and because of cancel culture it starts costing him advertisers and then his show.

That is really the perfect example of how modern cancel culture destroys careers for minor things like sexual harassment, when in the past that was just normal. That really is the perfect illustration of how cancel culture impacts real lives in a negative fashion.

 

[Checkmite]

But what about true victims of Cancel Culture like Bill O'Reilly? It was common knowledge that he sexually harassed his employees see the lawsuit from 2006 where he was recorded wanting to rum falafel all over his assistant in the shower. Nothing came of it because that was before cancel culture. Then he has another settlement for sexual harassment and because of cancel culture it starts costing him advertisers and then his show.

That's more of a case of coincident timing; as other media figures lost advertisers and/or their shows after similar negative publicity pre-"cancel culture", such as Glenn Beck, Brian Williams, and Matt Lauer. You can even go as far back as Don Imus, whose racist comments resulted in a massive exodus of sponsors and his eventual firing by CBS in a short amount of time, in a very close parallel to Bill O'Reilly's situation, yet before Twitter even existed.

Those people lost their jobs because of public sentiment, just like O'Reilly. Exactly like O'Reilly, in fact. Their employers' hands were forced by public opinion. The only difference is that it was piles of letters and phone calls that informed them of that public opinion. Really the only thing Twitter and similar social media has done is to concentrate a lot of that public expression in one place and give employers an expedited means of discovering it. It has not actually exacerbated it or the consequences of it.

 

[d4m10n]

There's probably an interesting conversation to be had about the decentralizing impact the internet has had on public discourse and more broadly on human society, but I can't see how such an obviously bad-faith framing like "cancel culture" is going to be a productive foundation for that.

Whom are you accusing of bad faith and do they read your posts?

That really is the perfect illustration of how cancel culture impacts real lives in a negative fashion.

Has anyone here argued that O'Reilly ought to have evaded professional consequences or that his termination was the result of cancel culture run amok?