Curiously enough, it seems that the presumption of innocence as a public standard has eroded and has been replaced with cancel culture. Cancel culture as defined by the Merrriam Webster is “the practice or tendency of engaging in mass canceling as a way of expressing disapproval” The aforementioned canceling entails the loss of one’s job, receiving disparaging messages through social media, etc. To put it simply, cancel culture is a modern day exile from one’s community. 

A few notable factors are to blame for in the rise of such a destructive form of punishment. First, is media; the lines between fact and opinion have been blurred as popular news outlets have become highly politicized. 

Fox News in an effort to push it’s right wing agenda misleads or utilizes blatantly false information. In 2020 CHAZ (Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone) was created as a safe space for indivduals who supported the Black Lives Matter movement. In an effort to portray a right leaning narrative of violence in CHAZ, Fox News doctored photos. Of the fabricated images were pictures of an armed man next to a vandalized building. CNN is also guilty of the same crime. In an effort to push a left wing agenda for gun control CNN demonstarted rapid firing of a fully automatic weapon when reporting on the Federal Assult Rifle Ban, a policy exclusively for semi automatic weapons. When the profession of reporting reliable unbias news gets tainted with political agendas, public opinion is bound to erratically change. 

Second, is social media; social media contains all the same problems as traditional media but out a exponentially bigger scope. This is for one main reason. The first being, accountability, or rather the lack of accountability. On social media anyone is free to post virtually anything to skew public opinion. Traditional media operates in the form of corporations and organizations so there is some burden and mechanisms of accountability. Compare this to social media, where most of the content being pushed is by personal entities that can very easily remain anonymous and circumvent the lax if any punishment. This materializes into real consequences; Pizzagate is a terrifying example. Pizzagate was a scandal and shooting that was a product of fake news. Edgar Maddison Welch on December 4, 2016 shot three rounds with his AR-15 and demanded to investigate claims of child trafficking in a pizza restaurant, Comet. Thankfully, no one was hurt, however, this incident could have very easily turned tragic. The allegations of Comet being used as a front for child trafficking was perpetuated by fake news sources after a leak. The leak included the owner of Comet, James Alefantis, in his contents. On a private group chat anonymous individuals spread misinformation of child trafficking citing construction in the basement and pictures of children.    

On another note, social media gives a mechanism for anyone to partake in the active canceling of others. The previously mentioned accountability issue is the stem of this problem as well. Anyone can send a death threat to someone they want to cancel without any substantial retribution. In the aforementioned Pizzagate incident, thousands took to social media and sent James Alefantis and members of his staff death threats.Without the use of social media such criticisms would have been substantially minimized.

However, the biggest root of cancel culture is groupthink. Groupthink is defined as “a pattern of thought characterized by self deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics.” Similar to mob mentality in a mad crowd and peer pressure in middle school, group think has materialized in the form of cancel culture. Individuals compelled by conformity, disregard logic and reasoning. In cancel culture this occurs when individuals supersede the context, facts, and evidence of a case with accusations, speculations, and surface level impressions. Such an example took place in January 2019. Nathan Phillips, was a highschool student who appeared to be mockingly smirking in front of an indeginous activist. For this he became instantly notorious nationwide. Millions of people jumped on the bandwagon and canceled Phillips. Thousands of death threats and a lawsuit later he was able to clear up the misunderstanding. The ideginous man instigated the confrontation and Phillips was simply offering a friendly smile. Yet, because of group think people from all over the country canceled an innocent highschooler. 

The impacts of public censure can be disastrous. While some such as Phillips managed to clean up other innocent individuals have to live with no job, destroyed relationships, and tarnished reputations as a product of the masses carelessness in applying the presumption of innocence. 

To advance as a society we must hold ourselves and others to a standard of applying the presumption of innocence in public censure. One mechanism that the public can use are the courts. One can file a lawsuit for defamation, tort, personal injury, etc. This keeps others accountable and mindful in applying the presumption of innocence. The courts as a form of deterrence will force people to consider the innocence of others before mindlessly canceling and destroying the life of an innocent individual. However, before resorting to such authoritative countermeasures we should as humans exercise some empathy. Understanding that the mere other is a person like oneself can go a long way in forgiving.