In an interview with Mariela Frostrup at the Cheltenham Literary Festival last week, Graham Norton dared to say that “cancelling culture” is just another word for accountability. He referred to a recent complaint by John Cleese.Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition, right John?
When asked if his thoughts on accountability included the abuse J.K. , suggested that it might be more enlightening to talk to transgender children and their parents.
I have long believed that what the right-wing media has called “cancellation of culture” is what reactionaries have been doing when they are found acting rearguard against the progress made by minorities over the past half-century. So I retweeted Norton’s clip, explaining that the status of transgender children and their parents has been the focus of so much debate online. Given that, she added, she agreed that she needed to hear more from transgender children and their parents.
Rowling responded by accusing Norton and me of casting our support behind “rape and death threats against anyone who dared not consent.” Although we said we would never condone it, Rowling doubled down and falsely claimed that Norton and I equated the threat of violence with accountability.
Norton deleted his Twitter account on October 17 after being attacked online by other users. Will John Cleese use GB News’ new platform to show solidarity with the latest victims of cancellation culture? Those with a reactionary view see this particular victim’s cloak as their own. Right and left may debate what cancel culture means, but there are universal principles that everyone should be aware of. It’s accountability.
I believe that freedom of expression gives us the right to be offended if our statements are generalized rather than individualized. It should be possible, but everyone involved in the debate needs to understand that freedom of expression does not mean freedom from consequences.
Content from partners
Rowling misunderstands the final caution expressed by both Norton and myself, and we stand by any response, no matter how badly it ends up for those who express opinions that others find offensive. I can’t speak for Norton, but like me, the threats made to individuals are indefensible and no one can do that, no matter what they say. I’m sure he’ll realize that he shouldn’t be subject to any kind of personal abuse. That includes Rowling, of course.
The failure of democratic societies to hold individuals accountable for their actions has intensified the trend towards authoritarianism over the past few years. The idea that free speech frees the speaker from any consequences has made social media a cauldron of anger and slander. Liability also has limits. Never use it as an excuse for intimidation or violence. But as long as it is balanced with the right to freedom of expression, I believe it is the only sure guarantee of civil discourse and a free society.
[See also: As a victim of abuse, I once agreed with JK Rowling]
Comments
Post a Comment