We like to think cancel culture holds people accountable, but somewhere along the way, canceling became less about consequences and more about giving people something to talk about. For people with money, fame or influence, this so-called consequence rarely does lasting damage. In fact, cancel culture often acts as free publicity, making it more performative than punitive for the powerful.
We’ve all seen powerful people in headlines, getting bad press for something they said or did. Then the next day everyone reacts and talks about it, and a few days later it feels like it goes away. Maybe an apology gets posted or an interview drops, but let’s be real: the whole thing turns into a cycle where the outrage boosts visibility instead of actually shutting anything down.
Ever heard the saying “all publicity is good publicity?” For celebrities especially, staying relevant, even for the wrong reasons, often means staying profitable and it keeps that passive income rolling.
Edward Barnes, a professor in the School of Cinematic Arts, says public figures can often recover from controversy due to image management and public attention cycles.
“I think the public wants to like public figures, since their image is crafted to be as likable as possible,” Barnes said. “At the same time, moments where they are shown to be imperfect can humanize them, which sometimes softens public reaction over time.”
Take Chris Brown for example. He’s been at the center of multiple controversies over the years, most infamously the 2009 assault of his then girlfriend Rihanna, which left her with visible injuries and led to widespread backlash and public “canceling.” But that moment didn’t end his career. It didn’t even remove him from it at all.
Since then, he’s remained tied to public controversy — whether its altercations with other artists, legal issues including arrests and probation, or other incidents that kept resurfacing in headlines. Each time, the pattern was consistent: outrage, headlines, discussion, then a return to business as usual.
A study from Oberlin College looked at whether public cancellations actually lower audience engagement, after tracking streaming numbers before and after major controversy moments, it was found there wasn’t a significant drop.
Even if celebrities aren’t completely cancelled, controversy does not always reshape their entire careers. Following the infamous feud between Drake and Kendrick Lamar, neither artist faced consequences from the public. Drake’s songs kept pulling huge streaming numbers during the feud. His reputation was debated constantly online, but his music never really left the conversation. On the other hand, Kendrick’s “Not Like Us” blew up, won five Grammys, and ended up at the Super Bowl halftime show, becoming a cultural moment on its own.
Payton Aguilar, a freshman studying business administration, says the Drake and Kendrick Lamar feud shows that having a bad reputation does not stop profit.
“We have to remember that at the end of the day they are both truly winning because no matter what, they are making money,” Aguilar said. “Whether or not we as listeners and supporters think the artist is ‘cancelled,’ the artist themselves are still getting money from our listens and plays.”
With the continued production of songs, albums and touring comes wealth, fame and a fan base. This serves as protection when it comes to powerful people actually being held accountable.
Outrage alone doesn’t end careers if the audience doesn’t leave. In a lot of cases, people separate the art from the artist, and the ongoing engagement keeps someone culturally and financially afloat, even during controversy.
Cancel culture works differently depending on who you are, which says a lot about our society. For people with power, it often doesn’t function as real accountability. Instead, they can even benefit from it. So the next time someone says a celebrity or politician has been “canceled,” it’s worth asking what that actually means and whether there’s really any accountability at all, or just attention that never fully turns into consequences.
Related Stories:
Support Student Journalism!
The DePaulia is DePaul University’s award-winning, editorially independent student newspaper. Since 1923, student journalists have produced high-quality, on-the-ground reporting that informs our campus and city.
We rely on reader support to keep doing what we do. Donations are tax deductible through DePaul's giving page.