Recently, Indonesia was stirred up by a trivial issue that caused a nationwide commotion. The issue of a tumbler or drinking bottle worth Rp300,000 that went missing on a train carriage caused the public to spend time on social media simply reading comments or even arguing about the behavior of a woman who complained about losing her tumbler.
As a result of the online complaint, an employee at PT KAI was reportedly fired, sparking protests from hundreds of people on the internet. They collectively criticized PT KAI and the woman who filed the complaint. More energy was wasted when it was discovered that the tumbler had not been lost.
The anger intensified, spreading everywhere. In anticipation, the company where the woman worked fired the employee who was considered to have caused the commotion and potentially damaged the company's reputation. The story ended sadly for the woman who reported the incident. She found herself devastated and broken. And not only her, her partner also received criticism from the community.
Such is the phenomenon of modern society, which now interacts more through social media. These massive, rapid, and often vicious interactions now function as a public court that can have fatal consequences when an individual becomes a common enemy. Such is the phenomenon of cancel culture intertwined in our lives.
It is a social phenomenon in the form of social pressure, where the community feels it has the power to punish those who are considered guilty. A society that is increasingly sensitive to moral, social, and ethical issues will react strongly when encountering actions that are considered discriminatory, unethical, or harmful to the public environment, even to an extent that may be considered unreasonable when measured against interactions in the real world.
As in the case of the woman who filed the complaint, cancel culture can quickly damage a company's reputation in the digital age. The impact can range from boycotts and a decline in public trust to financial losses.
From the perspective of the philosophy of freedom, this phenomenon raises the question of the extent to which society has the right to restrict individual expression. The influential British thinker and philosopher John Stuart Mill emphasized the importance of freedom of expression as a prerequisite for the development of truth. However, cancel culture can be seen as hindering this process if it becomes a tool for silencing dissent.
On one hand, cancel culture can be seen as a form of social control in which society uses collective pressure to enforce norms. In the perspective of Michel Foucault, a French philosopher, this reflects how power works through public discourse, not only through formal institutions. Cancel culture becomes a disciplinary mechanism that regulates behavior.
Cancel culture also reflects the crisis in modern philosophy between moral relativism—who determines right and wrong—and communitarianism, the right of communities to uphold shared values. It also reveals a paradox: society demands accountability, but at the same time can create a fear of free thinking.
Thus, cancel culture in philosophical terms is an arena of debate between individual freedom and social responsibility. It can be a means of moral correction, but it also has the potential to become a new form of repression.
Companies whose employees are affected by cancel culture can mitigate the situation through transparent, responsive, and ethical communication strategies. Immediately provide honest and open clarification to alleviate speculation. Admitting mistakes, apologizing, and demonstrating a commitment to improvement is more effective than being defensive.
In the future, with the continued expansion of social media use among the public, which can trigger rapid opinion formation, companies, especially those that interact with communities, need to form special teams to handle reputation and public communication issues.
It is also necessary to train employees on communication ethics, diversity, and social sensitivity so as not to cause controversy. There also needs to be a strong relationship with the community and consumers so that the company has the social capital to deal with crises.
Then, when disaster is unavoidable, don't rush into action. Study what happened, look for opportunities to restore public trust. Give appropriate punishment to those who are considered to have been affected by cancel culture because of their behavior.
So, we cannot completely avoid cancel culture, but we can manage its impact with quick, honest, and ethical communication. More than just surviving, those who are able to learn from this crisis can actually strengthen their reputation and public trust.
