
Cancel culture is just public shaming with wi-fi — Hanan Addeena Arman
At first, cancel culture seemed like a good thing. It gave power to the people. When big celebrities or companies did something offensive or harmful, they were finally held accountable.
No more sweeping things under the rug. It felt like justice.
But somewhere along the way, cancel culture stopped being about accountability. Now, it often feels more like public punishment. Social media acts like judge and jury, with millions of people piling on, calling names, and demanding consequences—without context, without facts, and most importantly, without compassion.
And it's not just celebrities anymore. It's random people, too. Regular folks caught on camera during a bad moment. Like that schoolboy who once ate on the MRT train. He was probably hungry, maybe just had a long day, and made a small mistake. But someone decided to film him, post it, and let the internet chew him up.
His face and actions were shown to thousands—maybe millions. All because he brought food on public transport.
He's a teenager. A kid. Not a criminal. But people online don't care. They just want something to be angry about.
This is the scary part of cancel culture. It makes us forget that the people we're attacking are human. They have feelings, families, and personal struggles we'll never know. It turns the internet into a place where people feel afraid to speak, afraid to act, afraid to be imperfect.
Of course, some actions deserve to be called out. Racism, abuse, corruption—those things shouldn't be ignored. But there's a big difference between calling something out and tearing someone down. Accountability means giving people a chance to understand, apologize, and grow.
The scary part of cancel culture is that it makes us forget that the people we're attacking are human with feelings, families, and personal struggles and the internet into a place where people feel afraid to speak, afraid to act, afraid to be imperfect. — Unsplash pic
Cancel culture doesn't always leave space for that. It's more like, 'You messed up. You're done. Forever.'
And what message does that send? That people can't change? That one mistake defines your whole life?
Even worse, cancel culture can silence important conversations. People stop sharing opinions or asking questions out of fear they'll say the wrong thing and be 'cancelled.' It creates a culture of fear instead of one of learning. And when we're too scared to talk, how can we grow?
The media plays a huge role in this too. News outlets love stories that spark outrage. Headlines are designed to grab attention, not to explain. And when a person is being dragged online, the media often joins in instead of helping people understand the full story. The more clicks, the better. But at what cost?
We need to start bringing empathy back into the conversation. Before we share that video, before we comment on something cruel, before we hit repost—ask: Who is this person? What's the full story? Are they really a villain, or just someone who made a mistake?
Social media is powerful. It can expose injustice, uplift voices, and create change. But when it's used to destroy instead of educate, to shame instead of understand, we all lose.
Everyone deserves a second chance. Everyone deserves to be seen as more than their worst moment.
So maybe instead of cancelling people, we start teaching. Listening. Forgiving. Because a kinder internet starts with each of us choosing empathy over outrage.
*The author is an undergraduate student of Universiti Malaya, taking an elective university course entitled 'Introduction to Journalism and Storytelling in Digital Age', and may be contacted via [email protected]
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Malay Mail
20 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
Home minister says no firm evidence to show Jho Low in China
KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 – Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail said authorities have yet to obtain concrete evidence to verify recent reports that fugitive financier Low Taek Jho — better known as Jho Low — is residing and working in China under a false identity. Speaking to reporters today, Saifuddin addressed renewed claims published by international investigative journalists alleging that Low has been using a fake passport and operating freely in China. 'To date, we have not received any solid or verifiable evidence to confirm these reports,' he said 'We take all leads seriously, but there is nothing concrete at this point that we can act upon.' Saifuddin added that Malaysia continues to rely on diplomatic channels and cooperation with foreign intelligence and law enforcement to pursue the case, but noted that the process is complex. 'We need more than media reports, we need official confirmation or cooperation from the country where he is allegedly residing,' he said. Jho Low is the key figure in the massive 1MDB financial scandal and is wanted by multiple jurisdictions, including Malaysia and the United States. Despite numerous sightings and reports over the years, efforts to arrest and extradite him have so far failed. Saifuddin said Malaysia remains committed to locating and apprehending him, but reiterated that international legal cooperation is essential. 'We will continue working with our counterparts but for now, there's no new breakthrough,' he concluded. Reports emerged recently alleging that Jho Low is living in luxury in China under unofficial protection. The report was made by investigative journalists Bradley Hope and Tom Wright.


Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
PM says government just trying to claw back stolen funds, not ‘punish the dead'
PUTRAJAYA, July 24 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today said the government's efforts to combat corruption are focused on recovering illicit funds, not punishing anyone — including the dead. Anwar also said the Opposition was using the Parliament as a platform to defend 'those who siphoned billions'. 'Even when action is taken, they say things like 'how can you do that, he's old now' or 'he's already passed away'. But we're not trying to punish the dead, we're trying to recover money that was unlawfully taken,' he said without naming anyone. 'They use Parliament to defend those who have siphoned off billions. How much was his wealth? RM4 billion. What business was he in? No one knows. And when he died, how much in assets did he have? RM2 billion. This is totally unacceptable,' he added in his speech at the finance ministry monthly assembly here. Anwar said that Perikatan Nasional is not championing the fight against corruption the way he did during his time in the Opposition. It was previously reported that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is seeking to seize and forfeit over RM3 billion in assets allegedly linked to the late Tun Daim Zainuddin, his widow Toh Puan Na'imah Khalid, their family members, and close associates.


Free Malaysia Today
2 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Dr M denied the chance to vindicate himself over Batu Puteh, lawyers say
Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said he does not need to be granted immunity in the Batu Puteh issue due to his age. PETALING JAYA : Dr Mahathir Mohamad's lawyers have slammed the government's decision not to haul the former prime minister to court over his role in the Batu Puteh issue due to his age. In a statement, Zainur Zakaria and Rafique Rashid Ali said Mahathir had been deprived of his right to vindication. 'We, the lawyers for Tun Mahathir, who have been looking forward to the opportunity to cross-examine the members of the Cabinet who claimed to have been deceived by Tun, are disappointed,' they said. A royal commission of inquiry (RCI) last year found that Mahathir had likely acted deliberately to influence the Cabinet to discontinue review applications regarding Batu Puteh's sovereignty in 2018, despite the views of international consultants who said the applications had a reasonable likelihood of success. The RCI recommended that a police report be lodged against Mahathir, saying a criminal investigation could be initiated under Section 415(b) of the Penal Code for cheating. On Tuesday, however, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim told the Dewan Rakyat that the government would not take action even though Mahathir 'was wrong' as the matter involved 'a former prime minister who is 100 years old'. In a post on X yesterday, Mahathir said he did not need to be granted immunity due to his age, and that he should be taken to court to be proven guilty. He also accused Anwar of acting 'as judge and prosecutor' in the matter. In their statement, Zainur and Rafique said it was not for the prime minister to conclude that Mahathir had committed a crime or wrongdoing based solely on the RCI's recommendations. 'It is for the court to decide,' they added. They also said that the RCI had breached 'important principles of natural justice in the conduct of the inquiry', as Mahathir and his lawyers had been barred from attending and could offer no defence against the allegations. Zainur and Rafique said such rights were enshrined not only in common law but also in the form of statutory rights, as stipulated in the Commission of Enquiry Act 1950. 'This fundamental right was denied to Mahathir on the grounds that the inquiry was merely 'a fact-finding inquiry'. 'However, the findings and recommendations of the commission proved otherwise,' they said.