Is cancel culture a threat to journalism?

Cancelled. Dragged. Shunned. Called out. All terms associated with cancel culture: the phenomenon of publicly rejecting a person or group because of something they have said or done. But, as with everything,

By Megan Geall

famous cases of cancel culture like these have good arguments behind them, and the act of calling out celebrities for their actions is often a worthy cause. But when it comes to journalism and the so-called ‘dragging’ of columnists or opinion writers for bringing up fair topics of discussion, the lines are blurrier. Is the sanctity of journalism as a profession under threat? How can journalists produce balanced reports and scrutinise authority fgures when they’re likely to receive a barrage of abusive comments?

“Once, below a piece, a man threatened to punch me in the face, and I was writing about my cat or something,” says journalist and personal essayist Esther Walker. “Until you’ve experienced it, you can’t really understand how terrible it is. It’s completely out of control and unacceptable.”Internet trolls and cancel culture can be dangerous for anyone, including journalists, and especially female journalists.

“Journalism is, bottom line, a dangerous job,” says Walker. “If you put yourself out there in the public doing anything – if you’re on TV, or reading the news, or just being journalists – that’s dangerous,

“It is scary when someone threatens you physically or sexually. Most women want to avoid that kind of confrontation, and so we

Walker’s approach to writing personal essays has changed over the last 20 years as social media has grown and changed the nature of journalistic discussion. Before Twitter started and our need for instant gratifcation, the news industry relied on daily print newspapers and BBC Children in , explains that while the way we receive news has changed, the role of the columnist has not. It remains a way to provide expert analysis and opinion on public interest matters,

“People read [columns] because they like to have their own views responded to and echoed,” she says. “You don’t often read it to gain information. You read it to gain backup, or to be challenged. I have had my mind changed by columns, so columns, I think, are more important

So where does that leave opinion writers, columnists, and journalists sharing their personal experiences in the current industry – where backlash and

“dragging” people online is increasingly becoming commonplace? Opinion writing opens up and encourages public discourse on important topics, such as Georgia Aspinall’s piece on the government failings in regards to the refugee crisis, using research and a journalistic voice to explain and construct an argument for her point of view.

When there is a good faith discussion between a journalist and a reader, it can be very benefcial as – while journalists like to pretend we know everything – we don’t. Reactions on social media have forced journalists and media organisations into apologies or rewrites, such as when the BBC apologised for mistaking Black Peppa and Baby in a video posted to the Drag Race UK social channels. Fans of the show took to Twitter to call out the BBC for being unable to differentiate between the only two black contestants with Black Peppa, herself, branding it “lazy and disgusting”.

It is only natural for journalists to feel protective over the work they create, but comments can often help journalists refect on their work and correct mistakes.

Describing a controversial column that she wrote in the past which criticised women for their reactions to sexual harassment allegations against a radio presenter in the eighties, Millard admits: “I was too hasty. Just because I felt okay with being unobjectively gazed at, or for example, wolf whistl[ed at] –I don’t mind that. But for some women, it’s disturbing, they don’t want it. And actually, I had my mind changed by the backlash.”

The issue of backlash and cancel culture arises when the exchange between the reader and journalist becomes argumentative, accusatory, and most importantly, personal. There is an important distinction between fair comment and fagging bias or inaccuracies, and sending pure hate comments.

“[Readers] are entitled to tell me that I’ve got something wrong, but you’re not allowed to say: ‘You’re fat and ugly, I hate your makeup and your writing is s***’,” says Esther Walker. “It is a very, very fne line. And if you’ve been beaten up a few times online, you can get very over-sensitive about fair comment.” at the same time.”

Social media platforms like Twitter have opened up journalists to a wider audience and a larger platform on which news and important topics can be shared and discussed. In some senses, social media allows journalists to fulfl our duty to the public — namely sharing and reporting on matters of public interest. However, it also has many downfalls — hateful comments being one.

Crossing the line between fair discussion and hateful comments is where things get problematic and destructive.

“I am certainly concerned that, sooner or later, someone’s going to get hurt in real life, as we’ve seen in politics,” says Vernon.

After the brutal murders of Labour MP Jo Cox in 2016 and Conservative David Amess two years ago, it is unsurprising a fear of this type of confrontation is causing self-censorship. Journalists wanting to avoid hateful comments and possible abuse have begun to choose their battles; only producing work for which they would be willing to suffer potential backlash and comments attacking their journalism and personal lives.

“I’m willing to say, ‘I disagree with public schools and I think they should be banned’, that is a hill I’m willing to die on,” says Millard, confdently adding: “I would never, ever, write about trans issues in public. I don’t know enough about it. I’m not close to anyone transitioning and I think if you are, it changes your view completely.”

“It’s so easy to formulate and post an angry comment or tweet now,” says Polly Vernon, style journalist and columnist. “Often before you’ve had the time to work out if you actually mean it, so people do.” Reading criticism of your own artistic and journalistic work isn’t easy, and unlike receiving hate mail, the sheer volume of messages to your email or social media pages makes it diffcult to ignore.

“I fnd it most diffcult when there’s a huge volume all at once, a pile on,” explains Vernon. “It’s not what they’re saying (largely, it doesn’t make a lot of sense and it’s obviously fawed). It’s more that tens or twenties or hundreds of people are on at you

Of course, journalists should be held accountable for inaccuracy and should allow fair criticism of their work, especially if they share opinions on subjects and experiences that they haven’t come up against themselves. Accountability is crucial. But self-censorship becomes an issue when it prevents the creative fow of ideas and free journalistic discussion. And, perhaps most importantly, receiving personal abuse starts becoming an expected part of the job.

“I am generally worried it’ll impact creativity, stop people trying out new ideas,” says Vernon. “There are some opinions I just won’t share any more because I can’t be bothered with the backlash.”