Celebrities Are Demanding Unconditional Adulation

Candice eetimesI had an epiphany this morning.  I finally got the ‘cancel culture’ complaint’s true, underlying meaning.  I finally got what people were screaming about when they claim that “free speech” is under threat.

First, let’s get real about what “free speech” means.  It means that one can say things critical (or nice) about political issues without the government stepping in to prosecute or harass one for saying them.  It has NEVER meant that one can say what one wants without others disagreeing.  (Nor does it mean that one can spread lies about a private individual or group to harm them.  We call that calumny, libel, slander, etc. and it is legally prosecutable.)

But lately, folks in the media are pushing a meme that is supposed to carry a negative valance, “cancel culture” that oppresses them and suppresses their “free speech”.  But what is “cancel culture” really?

This morning, after someone tweeting an angry tweet that I of all people should support “free speech” and fight “cancel culture” simply because I have worked to disseminate information that others don’t like… but I haven’t fought “cancel culture”… I got it.

“Cancel culture” is when ordinary people dissent from what a celebrity has said or done by using social media to express that displeasure, en mass, and by being so many, it looks like a “pile on”, etc., often followed by withdrawing the very adulation, attention, and money (ticket & book sales, clicks, views, votes, etc.) that made them celebrities and media “elites” in the first place.  Then, these celebrities whine and whinge about how unfair and wrong “cancel culture” is and demand free speech rights… and sign a letter saying how wrong it is that our modern culture allows ordinary people to express their dissent in the only way that they have the power… by withdrawing their adulation and fan participation.

So, instead of decrying “cancel culture”, I can’t help but see it as the simple voice of ordinary people.

And no, celebrities, media, business, political, or academic, do NOT have a right to unconditional adulation, or even our respect.

Further Reading:

Free Speech vs. Academic Freedom

Further External Reading:






Double Tap

Candice eetimesI have a bone to pick.  Today, I saw yet another meme posted dissing older people for using the double space after a full stop, stating that was only required because we learned to type on mechanical typewriters that used monospaced type setting.  Today, the computer doesn’t need that double space.


The two spaces after a full stop was NOT just because of typewriters. It is because it differentiates between a full stop at the end of a sentence and the period that denotes that an abbreviation has occured.  A single space distance tells the reader (and the text rendering algorithm) that this does not end the sentence, but a double space does.  Until we have a new character for denoting either a full stop or the abbreviation, then I will continue to use the double space.  If you examine today’s digital text rendering systems, many DO provide more space when using the double space bar entry.  The myth that one should not use the double space bar entry is based on the mistaken idea that just  because some modern computer text rendering algorithms may use micro-justification and automatic kerning that somehow the system will automatically provide additional space after the full stop that is different from that after an abbreviation.  While some do, most do NOT (e.g. facebook’s comments).  This effort to diss an older generation that understood the usage of the double space is a form of age prejudice combined with ignorance regarding text layout algorithms and the continued utility of the double space convention.