The DOI matches its Crossref record.
No Grand Pronouncements Here...: Reflections on Cancel Culture and Digital Media Participation
Abstract
Although there are numerous prominent examples of social media misuse, these cases should not disproportionately characterize the scope or potential of digital media participation as a whole. Using cancel culture as an entry point, this essay discusses how digital practices often follow a trajectory of being initially embraced as empowering to being denounced as emblematic of digital ills. However, while platforms such as Twitter do have characteristics that militate against nuanced debate, scholars can productively direct attention to interactions in other digital spaces, particularly using methods that yield more qualitatively informative data. These spaces include message boards and comment threads, which foster more long-form engagement. It is also important to look beyond the major English-language platforms, both to account for platform-specific features and so that conditions of online discourse routine in many global contexts, such as negotiating censorship, are centrally theorized in digital media studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sadler, O. (2022) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051221094769 · Cited by 40
“It has been argued that normally marginalized groups can feel empowered through their ability to contribute to the “cancelling” of an individual whose actions they deem problematic (Ng, 2020).”
BackgroundAnalysis of Moral Judgment on Reddit
Botzer, N., Gu, S., & Weninger, T. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2022.3160677 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Ng, E.
- Venue
- Television & New Media
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-07-26
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 621-627
- ISSN
- 1527-4764 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8316
- OpenAlex
- W3045751110
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 31.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.