Cancel Culture on Social Media from A Deontological and Utilitarian Perspective

Abstract

Social media has transformed from an emancipatory space into an arena of digital pathology, giving rise to various anomalies. One such anomaly discussed in this study is ‘Cancel Culture’. Given that positive legal regulations are often insufficient to address the root of these ethical issues, this study aims to evaluate social media anomalies through the lens of normative ethics, specifically comparing Immanuel Kant’s Deontology with the Utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. This qualitative study employs a library research method with an applied moral philosophy approach. Data analysis was conducted through stages of description, interpretation, comparison, and critical reflection on primary and secondary texts. The results of the study reveal a sharp dialectic between the two theories. Kant’s deontology absolutely rejects digital space anomalies as they reduce human rational dignity to mere means and violate the categorical imperative. Conversely, Bentham’s utilitarianism could potentially justify anomalies (such as high numbers of likes, shares and traffic on the social media platform TikTok) if the hedonistic calculation yields greater collective utility. However, Mill’s qualitative utilitarianism offers a middle ground through the Harm Principle, which rejects such anomalies if they infringe upon essential freedoms and individual autonomy. This study concludes that there is a need for integration between absolute respect for the dignity of the subject (Kant) and responsible freedom of expression (Mill) as the foundation for formulating contemporary digital ethics.