I need help with a comment regarding this discussion post:

To be honest, prior to reading this article I did not realize there was an actual term for this behavior. I strongly disagree with the practice of cancel culture as it usually does more harm than good.

Is callout or cancel culture good for society? Why or why not?

While parents and teachers are trying to impress upon kids of all ages the importance of not doing or participating in, the safety concerns, and emotional trauma that comes from cyber bullying. Kids then go on social media and see various examples of cancel culture happening and often being modeled by adults. So what are they supposed to think of these conflicting messages?

We would like to think the kids have a good head on their shoulders and what we have been teaching kicks into play about how to correctly resolve conflicts. However, we know that we do not live in a perfect world and kids will make wrong choices. What happens then when one kids hears a racist comment by another and inside of properly confronting them or informing an adult, they cancel that person on Facebook, Twitter, or Tik Tok? This will have far reaching effects on that childs social life, potentially any employment if they are working through school or a summer job, it could also bleed over to their parents from other parents lash back, not to mention the personal emotional issues caused. This is just an individual example on a small scale.

When cancellation happens to an adult or a business the potential costs of the cancellation increase if it is successful. People that start a call-out do not stop to consider fully these potential costs for they have given themselves over to rash emotions and are only focused on satisfying their immediate anger or pain. True, that while this kind of culture has been taking place for decades fighting against any perceived injustice done to a person, group, or company. What has changed is the availability of the format it takes place in.

Does callout or cancel culture silence different opinions or allow more opinions to be hears? Explain your answer & give examples if possible.

Instead of having to travel miles to join a march of solidarity, people can now organize local marches and stream them live and/or recorded via the Internet to any site they can, on any day they choose. This allows for people not only in the same country but worldwide to participate.

While it is great to be able to have this participation and see all the support a cause may get that started with a call-out or cancellation this beauty is only skin-deep so to speak. For with most of these callouts the only opinion being heard is the one of the majorities. You typically do not see or hear actual discussion or opinions from the other side. It seems whoever can shout the loudest or drum up the most support, no matter if the claims are true, is who gets heard.

I am a supporter of the Black Lives Matter movement. However, I use this as an example that only other opinions get silenced in callout culture for it seems a day does not pass anymore that we do not see a news story or a social media thread showing a new incident of police brutality further fueling the movement. However, what we are not hearing is statistics from the police perspective related to what they are doing to in response to this or to counter the claims. The police should be at least opening a dialog of some kind on a national level due to how large this movement has grown, and it should be done via an online format so any with Internet access can attend. It is only fair to hear out both sides, no matter how grim the evidence. They deserve the chance to discuss what has gone on, what chances are being made, and how solutions will be enforced in the future. This needs to be discussed openly and not behind closed doors. The New York Times ran a really interesting transcription of an interview moderated by one of their journalists between five people representing key groups all linked to the Black Lives Matter movement. One of these people was J. Scott Thomson prior police chief in Camden, N.J. from 2008 to 2019 (Reform Policing). This interview should have been broadcast for all to hear, instead it was posted in print and I came upon it in a search and it was not a top search headline at that. Thus these important views have been silenced.

What are the most productive ways to interact with someone who has said something offensive? Explain your choices.

How you respond when someone says something offensive depends to a point on the situation and format it is taking place in. If it is in person:

1) Take a breath and compose yourself to ensure you do not react emotionally to anything said and can have an actual conversation with the person.

2) Ask them if they are willing to discuss why they made their statement? What proof do they have to back it up?

3) Explain that it was offensive to you and why. Could be they just did not realize their statement could be taken offensively. Watch their body language and you own too. This is to ensure what the body is saying matches the spoken word.

If it was online, you would still follow steps 1 through 3 above but pay special attention to the words you type to ensure they convey the proper tone. It is very easy for online discussions to be taken out of context by a simple word(s) which can further inflame a discussion rather than deescalate it. Also, with online communication, ensure you do it via a private message or an e-mail, never in an open forum when trying to resolve or replying to an offense. If you know the offender, you can also call them to discuss the infraction over the phone. This at least allows you both to hear the tone of your voices even if you cannot see each other. There is also the possibility of a virtual call with applications such as Skype, Zoom, or Google Duo.