4 ms·

Nobody claimed tweets directly fire people, the whole point was that they influence other people. What is “power”? It’s influence over other people. The author

by dahart 4y ago

Nobody claimed tweets directly fire people, the whole point was that they influence other people. What is “power”? It’s influence over other people. The author wasn’t necessarily talking about jobs either, they were also talking about losing friends and suffering social stigma in local social spheres, which your comment doesn’t even remotely address. Nobody’s confused about how getting fired works or who’s doing the firing, but it’s incorrect to assert that the boss is always caving to pressure, throwing anyone under the bus, or avoiding bad PR. Many of the celebrities recently cancelled admitted to and apologized for sexual harassment, they lost their sponsorships, advertisers, and jobs, because the information spread about them was true. The point your comment is willfully ignoring is that information, rumors, truths, and lies, are what Twitter and other online media spread, and that this information influences others. We can spread true and false information faster than McCarthy’s day or any time in history. We have mountains of evidence that sometimes information goes viral and causes damage to people, sometimes to people in power, sometimes to businesses, and sometimes to democracies. Claiming that Twitter (and by extension other social media) has no power is to be willfully blind to what’s happening.

lapcat 4y ago
> The author wasn’t necessarily talking about jobs either, they were also talking about losing friends and suffering social stigma in local social spheres, which your comment doesn’t even remotely address. I don't address it because "cancellation" is normally understood as losing professional and financial opportunities due to personal opinions and actions, whereas losing friends due to personal opinions and actions is not really worth noting as a phenomenon. Friendship is inherently personal. > Claiming that Twitter (and by extension other social media) has no power is to be willfully blind to what’s happening. Of course Twitter has the power to spread information, and misinformation. But what people do with that information or misinformation is an entirely different matter. It ought to go without saying that one shouldn't uncritically believe everything one reads on Twitter.
- dahart 4y ago
  False. This distinction you’re trying to make between personal and professional does not exist with cancellation (and even if it did, which it doesn’t, you’re ignoring an absolutely massive gray area of ‘work friends’). Your personal definition of cancellation does not match what is “normally” understood nor what is documented https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture I don’t understand why you think saying that people shouldn’t believe everything they read is helpful. Yeah, obviously, and who ever disagreed? That’s a straw man and we still have a reality where social media is a powerful force for both good and harm. We still have rampant lies, bullying, climate misinformation, and Qanon. The evidence we have contradicts the claims made in your comments that social media isn’t powerful or that only people in power are doing the cancelling.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > Your personal definition of cancellation does not match what is “normally” understood nor what is documented https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture Well, if you're going to cite Wikipedia as documentation, I'm going to cite it too: "Criticism of the concept" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture#Criticism_of_the_concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture#Criticism_of_th... I get the impression that the term "cancel culture" can mean anything that anyone wants it to mean, and it ends up becoming amorphous complaining about random grievances real and imagined. (Kind of like the imaginary "War against Christmas", where Christmas is cancelled because some people choose to say "Happy Holidays".) Regardless, I would personally make a distinction between "I was fired because of X" and "My friends don't like me anymore because of X". I don't think it's useful to have one term that covers these two very distinct things, and also I don't think the latter is worth having much of a public debate about. It's difficult to take "cancel culture" too seriously when many self-described victims of cancellation were simply criticized. They seem to think any form is criticism is bullying and ostracism, and that everyone has to duty to be accepting of their obnoxious opinions.
    - dahart 4y ago
      How exactly does moving the goal posts to now argue that cancel culture doesn’t exist support your original claim that powerful people like McCarthy are the ones doing the cancelling and always have been? You’re contradicting yourself. It’s hilarious to argue with a first-hand account that something happened with what is essentially ‘I think your problem doesn’t exist because I define the thing you said as not a problem and nobody rational would have that problem.’ Arguing that cancel might be trivial in some cases completely fails to demonstrate that it’s not sometimes serious. We know it’s sometimes serious, just ask Harvey Weinstein. > I would personally make a distinction between “I was fired because of X” and “My friends don’t like me anymore because of X”. Good for you. Contrary to your claim, that’s not a distinction that was made either with “cancellation” nor with your own example of MyCarthyism. And again, you’re failing to capture the fact that most people’s social circle involves co-workers, and what the cross-over effects are between work and personal life. You’re also failing to capture family and church and neighborhoods and loads of other organizations of people where being ostracized can and does have a meaningful impact, for good or bad.

by dahart 4y ago

lapcat 4y ago

> The author wasn’t necessarily talking about jobs either, they were also talking about losing friends and suffering social stigma in local social spheres, which your comment doesn’t even remotely address. I don't address it because "cancellation" is normally understood as losing professional and financial opportunities due to personal opinions and actions, whereas losing friends due to personal opinions and actions is not really worth noting as a phenomenon. Friendship is inherently personal. > Claiming that Twitter (and by extension other social media) has no power is to be willfully blind to what’s happening. Of course Twitter has the power to spread information, and misinformation. But what people do with that information or misinformation is an entirely different matter. It ought to go without saying that one shouldn't uncritically believe everything one reads on Twitter.

dahart 4y ago
False. This distinction you’re trying to make between personal and professional does not exist with cancellation (and even if it did, which it doesn’t, you’re ignoring an absolutely massive gray area of ‘work friends’). Your personal definition of cancellation does not match what is “normally” understood nor what is documented https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture I don’t understand why you think saying that people shouldn’t believe everything they read is helpful. Yeah, obviously, and who ever disagreed? That’s a straw man and we still have a reality where social media is a powerful force for both good and harm. We still have rampant lies, bullying, climate misinformation, and Qanon. The evidence we have contradicts the claims made in your comments that social media isn’t powerful or that only people in power are doing the cancelling.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > Your personal definition of cancellation does not match what is “normally” understood nor what is documented https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture Well, if you're going to cite Wikipedia as documentation, I'm going to cite it too: "Criticism of the concept" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture#Criticism_of_the_concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture#Criticism_of_th... I get the impression that the term "cancel culture" can mean anything that anyone wants it to mean, and it ends up becoming amorphous complaining about random grievances real and imagined. (Kind of like the imaginary "War against Christmas", where Christmas is cancelled because some people choose to say "Happy Holidays".) Regardless, I would personally make a distinction between "I was fired because of X" and "My friends don't like me anymore because of X". I don't think it's useful to have one term that covers these two very distinct things, and also I don't think the latter is worth having much of a public debate about. It's difficult to take "cancel culture" too seriously when many self-described victims of cancellation were simply criticized. They seem to think any form is criticism is bullying and ostracism, and that everyone has to duty to be accepting of their obnoxious opinions.
  - dahart 4y ago
    How exactly does moving the goal posts to now argue that cancel culture doesn’t exist support your original claim that powerful people like McCarthy are the ones doing the cancelling and always have been? You’re contradicting yourself. It’s hilarious to argue with a first-hand account that something happened with what is essentially ‘I think your problem doesn’t exist because I define the thing you said as not a problem and nobody rational would have that problem.’ Arguing that cancel might be trivial in some cases completely fails to demonstrate that it’s not sometimes serious. We know it’s sometimes serious, just ask Harvey Weinstein. > I would personally make a distinction between “I was fired because of X” and “My friends don’t like me anymore because of X”. Good for you. Contrary to your claim, that’s not a distinction that was made either with “cancellation” nor with your own example of MyCarthyism. And again, you’re failing to capture the fact that most people’s social circle involves co-workers, and what the cross-over effects are between work and personal life. You’re also failing to capture family and church and neighborhoods and loads of other organizations of people where being ostracized can and does have a meaningful impact, for good or bad.