Sir, – In her discussion of the deployment of cancel culture, Molly O'Gorman omits mention of its major ironies or hypocrisies ("Demonising often deeply flawed individuals deflects heat from failure of institutions", Opinion & Analysis, April 22nd).
Cancellation is largely a strategy of people perceived as “woke”, progressive or, as traditionally named, extremely liberal.
But the absolute keystone of liberal thinking is freedom of expression. Cancel culture, by making certain viewpoints obligatory and others unsayable, takes liberalism to a diametrically opposite, authoritarian position. This is inherently ridiculous; you cannot claim to be liberal if you only offer freedom of expression to those who happen to share your views.
Second, the writer notes it to be “interesting” that the academy promptly reacted to the transgression of Will Smith, striking the Oscar host, a physically much smaller man, while they were slow to act against Roman Polanski and Harvey Weinstein. Media reports of the crimes of Weinstein emerged in October 2017, and he was rapidly expelled by the academy, before that year ended. It has to be recognised that committing a crime on stage at the Oscar ceremony is different from a legal allegation, however. The academy did not wait for the criminal conviction to occur, in 2020, but in fact expelled Weinstein within a month, as with Will Smith. The real issue Will Smith’s action raises is whether it is acceptable to hit someone whose jokes or statements you dislike, again a test of freedom of expression. – Yours, etc,
:fill(white):background_color(white)/static.themebuilder.aws.arc.pub/irishtimes/1647534191476.png)
BRIAN O’BRIEN,
Kinsale,
Co Cork.