The Highs and Lows of Cancel Culture

The idea of boycotting goods and services is not new; however, there is arguably a new form of boycotting called cancel culture. Cancel culture revolves around the idea of “canceling” or ostracizing individuals or organizations because of their behavior. Lately, cancellation has stemmed in part from divergent political views, racism and sexual assault - correlating to the rise in political tension, BLM protests and the MeToo movement. Cancellation is contagious - continuing to publicly support a cancelled individual can lead to one’s own cancellation. We hear about it the most with celebrities but companies can be affected as well. The spectacle cancellation causes is often grand but is it lasting? What does this mean for brands? Here’s my take on the highs and lows of cancel culture today.

The Highs

Visibility:

Media is saturated with news, entertainment and advertisements that constantly vye for and/or divide our attention. Because our feeds are tailored to our tastes, our media consumption is further segmented. And so, the concept of virality is sought after since it brings things to the forefront of crowded mediums. Cancellations typically gain a lot of attention with its easy clickbait content and headlines. There will then always be records of it and it’ll be hard to brush allegations under the rug. Conversations about toxicity in industries are often brought to light as well. This increased visibility for the moment puts pressure on public entities or figures to do right in the public eye to avoid future scrutiny.

Brands can use increased visibility of controversial topics to make their stance known. It’s not a complete CSR effort, but it’s a place to start. Transparent brands are more likely to attract loyal consumers - knowing where the brand stands lets them know if they should stand with the band too. We live in a time in which the lines of privacy are redrawn and blurred - ensuring wrongdoings are brought to light.

Accountability:

In the midst of civil unrest, there is increased pressure on brands to be held accountable for claims they make in hashtags and public statements. Not upholding one’s word ends in accusations of performative activism where people participate in shallow or empty forms of activism to gain public favor and avoid persecution. People expect and demand real, immediate action. This could be in the form of firings, product recall, apologies, and so on.

This means brands have the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is (so to speak). It allows brands to be viewed favorably as a brand that is more socially responsible or aware resonates more with Gen Z. Consumers are aware that brands have the power to positively or negatively affect our society and it becomes a question of will they use that power for good.

The Lows

Short term effects:

culture can be the boycott without the backbone. Public outrage has the tendency to lose steam with people getting angry for a short period of time before moving on. This allows for loopholes where the canceled individual or entity can just lay low and allow everything to blow over. The best example of this is celebrities being canceled one minute and then not. Celebrities like Cardi B have been canceled multiple times, and yet they continue to thrive after the fact.

Sometimes outrage worsens when addressed so it may be best for brands to keep interaction with it to a minimum. This could be seen as a good thing for brands that are worried about scandals disrupting their image. It is worth noting that this is a case by case basis - some topics won’t go away if not properly addressed and can damage a brand’s relationship with their audience. We’ll get into this in the next section.

Lack of source credibility:

This is where false information is spread. In the era of trolling and fake news, it can be risky for people to believe everything they read. However, there are people who don’t have the time or patience to fact check - instead going along with the cancellation without checking the source. This leads to a snowball effect and in some cases can lead to doxing. Because cancellation is contagious, some people would rather go along with the cancellation to avoid their own.

The Illusory truth effect is a big risk for brands. Brands can correct and address a problem many times but if the information is incendiary enough, people may continue to circulate the story. Even if the story is proven to be untrue, there will be people that won’t want to associate with the brand. People are also not afraid to share potentially false information for the sake of conversation. In this case, it is very important to keep true information in circulation to combat conversation surrounding falsehoods.

Conclusion:

Participating in cancel culture is easy but real change is not. Cancel culture has the power to encourage visibility and accountability in brands, yet it can also encourage a mob mentality that promotes crucification of anyone at the slightest offense. Cancel culture’s reputation for having a mob mentality can tear attention from those who are actually seeking positive change.

Below is a list of celebrities and a few brands that have been (or are) canceled along with links for context. Note: some have been canceled multiple times. Are there any you were unaware of or disagree with? Are there any that you didn’t see on the list? Tweet me @AMoenaiStrategy with the hashtag #AMScancelculture and let me know!