What is Cancel Culture?
Cancel culture is the online practice of shaming and boycotting individuals in the spotlight for behavior deemed offensive or problematic. This usually plays out on social media and everyday users “call out” the public figures and demand consequences. These consequences usually include lost brand deals, losing followers, and demand for accountability.
Cancel culture thrives in digital spaces where virality accelerates judgement. While it may appear democratic, fame and wealth often influence whether someone is canceled or simply criticized.
Accountability vs. Public Shaming
Clark (2019) argues that cancel culture often reflects a mix of social justice and spectacle, where news outlets amplify outrage to feed public demand for punishment. Are we seeking accountability or simply inflicting punishment for entertainment? News platforms often push the cancellation by reporting on the outrage viewed on social media.
The Social Responsibility theory states that the media has freedom of expression but should act ethically and factually. Sometimes there is a genuine need for a celebrity to be held accountable for their actions while other times it is simply performative for clicks and likes.
Screenshot from James Charles apology video Credit: James Charles YouTube
James Charles: A Case Study in Misconduct and Public Response
In April 2019, beauty influencer James Charles got into a very public feud with fellow beauty influencer Tati Westbrook who accused him of being manipulative of younger fans. The allegations got very serious in early 2021 when inappropriate messages were released. These messages included Charles allegedly pressuring minors into flirtatious exchanges, despite their age being known or discoverable.
The fallout from this involved him losing over 3 million subscribers in less than a week and losing even more after the newer accusations came out. According to Insider (Tenbarge, 2021), Morphe officially ended its partnership with James Charles due to consumer backlash and misconduct allegations.
Charles released several videos prior to his main apology. These earlier videos often denied the allegations and deflected responsibility. In April 2021, he released a formal YouTube apology titled “Holding myself accountable” where he admitted to his wrongdoings and promised to change. He expressed his intent to change by stepping away from dating apps, rethinking how he communicates with fans, and committing to personal growth. Many criticized the apology as performative and incomplete.
Now the question is, was this feud just for the clicks or to hold Charles accountable for his statements and actions?
Redemption and Growth
Ethical questions arise when we consider the difference between accountability and public shaming. James Charles admitted fault and corrected actions followed these patterns. But once audience trust is broken, it is hard to regain because they feel their relationship has been betrayed.
Permanently labeling someone for their past offenses might contradict the goal in restoring justice principles. Cancel culture’s downfall is that it leaves no space for forgiveness. Aja Romano (2020) argues that cancel culture surged in 2020 as people, confined to social media, used old content to call out public figures.
Jenna Marbles on the red carpet at an event for YouTubers Credit: David Livingston // Getty Images
Jenna Marbles: A Different Approach
In contrast to James Charles, Jenna Marbles showed how ethical responses can resonate with fans. In 2020, videos resurfaced of Marbles from 2012 containing racial stereotypes and blackface. Instead of denying or downplaying the allegations, she quickly issued a sincere and quite emotional apology and voluntarily left YouTube at the same time.
Marbles didn’t use the scandal to profit or redirect attention. She removed videos and distanced herself from her online platforms. Despite not being back on YouTube, she has maintained respect in the creator community. This worked in her favor, because she released a very transparent apology while also stepping away voluntarily. She didn’t make any money from the scandal like other creators and retained goodwill with her loyal audiences. Cancel culture tends to enforce the belief that certain actions permanently define one’s character, regardless of growth or context.
Her case illustrates that when someone acknowledges their harm and follows it with meaningful, self-imposed consequences, it can create an open space for growth for themselves and their audiences.
Conclusion
Cancel culture asks us to not only consider who gets cancelled, but also who gets forgiven and why. Is it gender based, race, follower size? Society has many biases that often shape who is allowed this redemption.
If cancel culture is to become ethically sustainable, it needs to evolve. It should distinguish itself between harmful patterns of behavior and one-time errors. It should demand accountability without erasing the possibility of redemption. The goal shouldn’t be permanent exile, but instead informed consequences and space for repair.
Ultimately, cancel culture is not inherently unethical but how we use it and whether we allow space for learning and repair, determines its values.
Written by: Vicki Robinson