Calling In vs. Canceling Out

Since the George Floyd protests began in late May, social media platforms have become a space to out celebrities for problematic behavior, stemming from a much larger conversation about what it means to be Black in America. This conversation has since bubbled over into a broader movement revealing celebrities’ controversial histories of promoting racist, sexist, homophobic, and anti-semetic sentiments. Instagram accounts, such as Diet Prada, have championed these efforts to demonstrate how public figures benefit from and even profit off of harmful content. 

Outspoken social media communities are fed up with celebrities who have built their platforms, wealth, and following off of hateful imagery and speech–even when under the guise of comedy or satire. Each celebrity's identity, platform, profession, history of problematic behavior, and initial response to criticism play a role in the public’s treatment of them–we, the audience, are ultimately left to decide their fate.

Whenever disturbing old or new stories surface about a public figure or influencer, we are faced with a choice: do we want to call them in or cancel them out?

To call someone in is to acknowledge their mistakes and prior problematic behavior, yet continue to include them in social discourse about the group or identity they have hurt. Calling someone in means instigating conversations with the individual and further encouraging their ongoing activism with issues of race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. However, the act of calling in does not automatically denote forgiveness; it is solely a quest to educate.

Calling someone in means informing that person of who they offended, why their actions were wrong, and how they can become an ally for marginalized identities and communities. By doing so, the hope is that that individual, group, or company is able to take what they have learned and reflect on how they have changed in order to create an accepting and safe platform moving forward–regardless of their professional field. Calling in presents them with the positive opportunity to learn from their mistakes and acknowledge their past ignorance.

The concept of calling in emerged in direct opposition to the idea of canceling out: unfollowing, condemning, and actively invalidating a celebrity or brand’s platform as information of harmful actions are exposed. The term “cancel culture” describes social media communities’ instinct to cancel a public figure instead of beginning conversations with them. The buzzword “canceled” originated when the #MeToo movement gained traction in 2017, and the first usages of the term are largely attributed to Black Twitter. Sex offenders and predators, such as Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, were canceled and stripped of their once widely celebrated Hollywood influence.

Cancel culture is a call to action to no longer support individuals who use their power for oppression. While cancel culture is not very effective when applied to politicians (they ultimately need to be voted out), for influencers and celebrities, cancel culture has the power to dramatically decrease fanbase, resulting in a loss of ad money, sponsorships, and media deals.

As Lisa Nakamura, a professor at the University of Michigan states, “People talk about the attention economy — when you deprive someone of your attention, you’re depriving them of a livelihood.”

Many people have been vocal about canceling cancel culture as a whole, however, there are moments when I deem it necessary. Cancel culture is a unique and efficient means of removing an individual’s power from social discourse and proving that their actions (or inactions) bear hefty consequences. 

In recent weeks, YouTuber Shane Dawson and Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver DeSean Jackson have received intense criticism for racist and anti-semetic content. Dawson, one of the first YouTubers to amass a cult following just a few years after the site’s launch, is now under fire for his past videos where he is seen performing in Black Face, saying the N word, and acting as a pedophile for a so-called skit where he pretends to masturbate to a poster of 11-year-old Willow Smith. Similarly, Football player DeSean Jackson has received heavy backlash this month for his recent Instagram stories featuring antisemetic quotes misattributed to Hitler and mentioning a white Jewish plot to “blackmail America.”

Although both celebrities are receiving just and deserved criticism for their actions, DeSean Jackson was called in, whereas Shane Dawson was canceled out.

Since DeSean Jackson posted anti-semetic quotes in early July, he has since publicly apologized. Although Jackson’s actions have been condemned by both the NFL and the Philadelphia Eagles, his posts have given him the opportunity to speak with a Holocaust survivor, as well as Philadelphia Rabbi willing to share their stories. Despite the hurt Jackson caused the Jewish community, he is being pushed to engage in difficult, awkward, and painful conversations that ultimately help educate everyone who is a part of his following. While he has not been forgiven, he has not been canceled.

I can only speculate why this is the case, but there appears to be a consensus that his antisemetic posts can be attributed to sheer ignorance instead of malintent. In her recent article in The Atlantic, contributing writer Jemele Hill proposes that perhaps this was Jackson’s distorted attempt to uplift the Black community by means of putting another down: a strategy that many were quick to point out as toxic, unproductive, and dangerous. Throughout her article, Hill laments on what she calls her own “Hitler moment” when she wrote in a 2008 article for ESPN that “rooting for the celtics is like saying Hitler was a victim.” As a black woman, Hill reflects on her own shameful “cultural blindspot” for the Jewish community and reminds her readers that not all historically marginalized communities have the same awareness and empathy for others. Hill does, however, argue that Jackson has not received nearly as much criticism and punishment as his actions merit; she merely provides us with contextual information that may explain why he was called in, and luckily for him, seemingly given a second chance.

Shane Dawson, however, was not given such public mercy for a variety of reasons. Prior to Dawson’s apology video released in late June titled “Taking Accountability,” the YouTube star spent years profiting off of skits in which he reduced Black people to exaggerated stereotypes, thus supporting the United States’s ugly history of black face. Throughout his apology video, Dawson recalls the few people who were vocally opposed to his racist content and attempted to educate him on the history of Black portrayal in America. Dawson actively resisted such feedback and even continued to make defamatory content about the very individuals who tried to call him in. Prior to his release of “Taking Accountability,” Dawson had posted other videos defending his actions and providing excuses. Although he appears to be earnestly apologizing now, the damage has been done. 

Dawson has been on YouTube for over twelve years, steadily building a fanbase of over 22 million young subscribers and a net worth of about $12 million. He has spent this time online enforcing stereotypes and further sending a message to his young fanbase that his behavior is acceptable, entertaining, and even hilarious. 

To put it bluntly, cancel culture exists as a force for good when applied to celebrities like Shane Dawson. Years of Black Face, saying the N word, and sexualizing children for the sake of “provocative” content is not worth our calling in–especially after people tried and failed to do just that for years. He was unwilling to educate himself and acknowledge his mistakes without making excuses when he was first called in years ago.

Dawson’s cancelation, however, does not mean that he will stop creating videos or using his platform to entertain and influence millions. It means that we, the audience, have chosen to not only ignore this content, but actively oppose it. While that may seem ineffective to many, as Dawson still has a cult following, he has lost over half a million followers on his main channel in the past few weeks alone, and YouTube has demonetized Dawson’s three outlets on the site. 

Both DeSean Jackson and Shane Dawson have shared and created appalling content that has come to light in the past few weeks. Jackson was called in, whereas Dawson was canceled out for a variety of reasons I can only speculate. Whether called in or canceled out, prominent figures on social media, in pop culture, or both must bear the brunt of influence.

What I like about cancel culture is that the inherent accountability or even threat of cancelation brings the power back to the people. Every athlete needs the support of their fans and every influencer needs their followers, views, and likes. We are the reason for their fame, and we can take our support away as fast as we were once willing to give it.

A professional athlete and comedy conspiracy theorist YouTuber are both being held accountable for their actions in different ways, although neither figures seem inherently political. We are dissolving the divide between pop culture and politics and deciding on a case by case basis whether we want to call in or cancel out.

Both strategies are powerful tools that we, the people, must use wisely. If we call someone in, we must understand the work required to educate and be willing to speak with those we may not agree with. If we cancel someone out, we must consider it absolutely necessary to eliminate that person from social discourse as to weaken their influence. 

While there are few cases where the choice between canceling out and calling in appears clear, most cases require us to make the difficult choice for ourselves. It is ultimately up to us to decide what we believe is the best course of action to foster a safer and more empathetic online community. There will always be people who are quick to cancel or eager to educate, but the right decision is almost never cut and dry.

Whether you choose to cancel out or call in, the choice is yours, so do so wisely and for the right reasons.