2 ms·

That's a good point, what's the difference between cancel culture and boycotts? Does anyone know whether there is one?

NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
Cancel culture typically targets individuals with the goal of removing their ability to participate in open society - sometimes that extends into calls for a person to lose their livelihood. Boycotts target companies with the goal of driving policy change through commercial power. I don't really think those two look very similar.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Can you elaborate on "participate in open society"? I'm not very familiar with cancel culture but AFAIK it's done against celebrities so people unfollow them or stop buying their products.
  - flyingfences 6y ago
    Increasingly, it's being done against normal people - mid-level or even low-level employees, contributors, members, participants, etc. - for things they've said or done in their personal time. See "Donglegate" [1] and "Opalgate" [2], for well-known examples. [1] https://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-overreaction-and-everyone-pays/ https://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-... [2] https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941
    - StavrosK 6y ago
      Oh, I see. Yeah, that's... Something else.
    - pseudalopex 6y ago
      "Donglegate" happened at a professional conference. The PlayHaven employee represented his employer. Adria Richards didn't even contact PlayHaven. The article points out PlayHaven implied the PyCon incident wasn't the only reason they decided to fire the employee. Richards was also fired and 10 months later was still unemployed.[1] People in the community criticized how everyone handled the incident. PyCon changed its code of conduct to discourage "public shaming".[2] "Opalgate" went nowhere. Elia Schito kept his position and still mentions it in his Twitter profile.[3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-shaming-lindsey-stone-jon-ronson https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5415256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5415256 [3] https://twitter.com/elia https://twitter.com/elia
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
flyingfences 6y ago
I would say that, generally, boycotts have been organized against specific companies or groups that are well understood to have clearly and undeniably done something wrong, whereas a lot of these "cancel" storms, often started by rumors and or heresay, build up so quickly that there is not a chance for examination, no time to question whether the "cancellation" is deserved.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Hm, true, this "witch hunt" mentality seems to be common in internet "activism".
  - loopz 6y ago
    "Witch hunt" and "bullying" are words that closely describe the mob rule mentality. The simple truth is that most people have no problem supporting bullies. It's the rare exception that people stand up against bullies, as needs to be done to avoid toxic exclusionary tactics and "rule by the bully". We now witness the lack of bully immunity in the population, and its dire consequences, caused by the accellerations from "social" media.

Cancel culture typically targets individuals with the goal of removing their ability to participate in open society - sometimes that extends into calls for a person to lose their livelihood. Boycotts target companies with the goal of driving policy change through commercial power. I don't really think those two look very similar.

StavrosK 6y ago
Can you elaborate on "participate in open society"? I'm not very familiar with cancel culture but AFAIK it's done against celebrities so people unfollow them or stop buying their products.
- flyingfences 6y ago
  Increasingly, it's being done against normal people - mid-level or even low-level employees, contributors, members, participants, etc. - for things they've said or done in their personal time. See "Donglegate" [1] and "Opalgate" [2], for well-known examples. [1] https://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-overreaction-and-everyone-pays/ https://arstechnica.com/staff/2013/03/donglegate-is-classic-... [2] https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941 https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/941
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    Oh, I see. Yeah, that's... Something else.
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    "Donglegate" happened at a professional conference. The PlayHaven employee represented his employer. Adria Richards didn't even contact PlayHaven. The article points out PlayHaven implied the PyCon incident wasn't the only reason they decided to fire the employee. Richards was also fired and 10 months later was still unemployed.[1] People in the community criticized how everyone handled the incident. PyCon changed its code of conduct to discourage "public shaming".[2] "Opalgate" went nowhere. Elia Schito kept his position and still mentions it in his Twitter profile.[3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-shaming-lindsey-stone-jon-ronson https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/21/internet-... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5415256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5415256 [3] https://twitter.com/elia https://twitter.com/elia
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

flyingfences 6y ago

I would say that, generally, boycotts have been organized against specific companies or groups that are well understood to have clearly and undeniably done something wrong, whereas a lot of these "cancel" storms, often started by rumors and or heresay, build up so quickly that there is not a chance for examination, no time to question whether the "cancellation" is deserved.

StavrosK 6y ago
Hm, true, this "witch hunt" mentality seems to be common in internet "activism".
- loopz 6y ago
  "Witch hunt" and "bullying" are words that closely describe the mob rule mentality. The simple truth is that most people have no problem supporting bullies. It's the rare exception that people stand up against bullies, as needs to be done to avoid toxic exclusionary tactics and "rule by the bully". We now witness the lack of bully immunity in the population, and its dire consequences, caused by the accellerations from "social" media.