What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
In this video, the speakers discussed about some important point related to cancel culture. The host asked them several questions and the three guests answered it based on their own perspectives and knowledge. Those things being discussed are about the real examples of cancel culture, the validity of cancel culture, the cure for cancel culture, and how entrepreneurs and leaders can navigate a society inflicted by cancel culture.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The three speakers’ main purpose is to answer and explain regarding the points about cancel culture. All of the questions are from the host and the guests answered it with their own knowledge and experiences. I do think the main purpose is to give the viewers different sides of cancel culture.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
The video is from the channel called Culture Road™ Podcast. The three speakers involved in the video are female entrepreneurs, they are Evelyn Miller, Monique Idlett, and Collette Leonard. The host is DeEtta Jones. She is an executive trainer and industry veteran. They spoke about cancel culture based on their different background knowledge and experiences. I think there’s not much source in this video because they came up with their own perspectives. So, I think the speaker isn’t trustworthy enough when they talk about cancel culture. However, I think in some points they are trustworthy to spoke about it. They made some points related what they did in real life as entrepreneurs dealing with cancel culture and I think it’s trusted.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
Evelyn Miller tends to highlight that the cancel culture agenda has a good and also bad effect to the criminal. She said that cancel culture is not the perfect system. There are definitely people who are going to be injured. But, she also agreed that cancel culture makes people more accountable for their actions and what they are doing is social media. Monique Idlett explained her idea that cancel culture is a toxic movement. Based on her opinion, she said that we should cancel the thing that actually makes sense for example we should rewrite law instead of cancelling someone. She thought that cancelling individual it’s not changing anything. Collete Leonard questioned the effectiveness of cancelling someone. She also said that the way of educating people by cancelling them just like destroying their lives instead of give a learning moment it is something that didn’t sit well with her.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
The speakers have valid arguments because when they came up with their opinions they often support it with real-life examples.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
https://www.ucf.edu/pegasus/is-cancel-culture-effective/
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video discussed about definition of cancel culture, the origin of cancel culture, the celebrities who got effect of cancel culture, and there is a brief explanation about #MeToo movement in social media that made the cancel culture got louder in society.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of the speaker is to give the information by highlighting the multiple sides of the topic.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
The speaker in this video does not appear because it is just her voice over. It is 3 minutes video explained about cancel culture with illustration. They mentioned a source in the video. They explained according Pew study there are 44% of Americans think they know what it means to be canceled while another 56% hasn’t heard much of the term. Some people think cancel culture is unjust and goes too far but about half the people familiar with the term say its purpose is to hold people accountable. I think the source is trustworthy because I have searched and found the study that has been mentioned in the video.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s attitude is neutral towards the subject. It is because they just state the common knowledge with the real data to support the idea in the video. I cannot find any statement which indicates about their position (agree or disagree) towards cancel culture.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
Yes, they do. They support the key point by giving the real examples and the research data that has been conducted specifically in US about cancel culture.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/08/17/how-americans-feel-about-cancel-culture-and-offensive-speech-in-6-charts/
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video discussed about analysis mental health and personality factors behind cancel culture phenomena. The video also mentioned about the idea cancel culture is basically just like an old concept of boycott but there is something that make it different. The criteria of cancel culture and the personalities of cancel culture’s active participants are clearly explained in this video. People who engage in this behaviour is really anecdotal, often these people do not identify as part of cancel culture, but rather they promote the idea that they are warriors in a great moral battle. The speaker added some points about the paradox of cancel culture is that its mission is supposed to cause positive change but the method does not actually allow for growth. In his opinion, he said that cancel culture simply makes everything worse. A dialog or discussion are more makes sense and effective.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of the speaker is to analyze and explain the mental health and personality factors behind cancel culture.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
This video is from Dr. Grande’s YouTube Channel covers topics related to counselor education and supervision including but not limited to mental health, human behavior, relationship dynamics, psychopathology, personality theory, true crime, pop culture, research, statistics, SPSS, Excel, appraisal, and group counseling. Dr. Todd Grande has a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and Supervision. He is a Licensed Professional Counselor of Mental Health (LPCMH) and a Licensed Chemical Dependency Professional (LCDP). I think the video trustworthy enough to be considered as one of my sources. The speaker explained and stated his opinion based on some research that have been conducted related to cancel culture.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
He profoundly disagreed with the concept of cancel culture. He said that cancel culture simply makes everything worse. Rather than cancelling someone, conducting a dialog or discussion are more makes sense and effective according to his statement. He also stated based on the evidence that objects of cancellation can become more popular due to the increased exposure from people.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
In this video, the speaker has valid and strong arguments because he explained based on the research. I found the articles that be used as a source in the video description.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
Sundar, S. (2020). Call-out culture demands perfection from everyone except oneself. BMJ, m158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m158
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video discussed about the reality of the toxic cancel culture in Korea. The video explained the celebrities that have been cancelled because of their scandal. Their reputation will be tarnished. Then, they will be blacklisted from all TV programs and advertisements. It can be seen that many celebrities can get cancelled overnight by people after their scandal blew up. Korea has a pattern of putting all the attention on social media and attacking one celebrity at a time to see their downfall. They do not give them a second chance right away. In Korea, the celebrities are expected to not only entertain and produce good quality of their work, but also set a standard for society. I can find in the video about the reason why there is a standard for celebrity in Korea. The speaker explained that Korea has some sort of conformity and obedience. The video also highlighted the differences of cancel culture in Korea and in western context.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of the speaker is to share her idea about the reality of toxic cancel culture in Korea.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
The speaker is Sienna Hong, a Korean youtuber. She used some sources for her video and mostly from news articles. In the video also can be found a source from a professor in KyungHee University that explain about the reason why there is a standard for celebrity in Korea. I think the video is trustworthy because she only gives us the reality of cancel culture in Korea based on her view as a Korean and from the sources.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
After I watched the video, I think the speaker disagree about toxic cancel culture by mostly highlighting bad effects of it. However, in a part of the video she state that the cancellation can normally happen when the scandal is huge. It means that she normalization the cancel culture in some cases.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
The speaker supports the key points with the sources. I think it is quite valid and strong.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
https://www.southsonder.com/post/how-k-pop-s-cancel-culture-exposed-the-industry-s-perfect-illusion
What is being discussed in the video? Explain your answer.
The video discussed about the form of cancel culture nowadays and its change. The cancel culture actually has changed significantly due to the use of social media. When the pandemic era began, society become more polarized people have much more concern what is going on strictly through social media and news. In that case, cancel culture has really changed. People are getting news all the time. There is expert on everything,. There is a version of expertise out there and more voices are being heard. The cancel culture won’t simply go away. It has been rooted since the beginning of society of human civilization. In cancel culture also has the boundaries, sometimes in positive ways, sometimes in very negative ways. And that’s usually what cancel culture comes into place. When people hit that boundary, it means unhealthy for our culture and for society.
What is the speaker’s main purpose? Explain your answer.
The main purpose of the speaker is to give explanation about the evolution of cancel culture and how it cannot disappear.
How trustworthy is this video? Who is the speaker? What is the source? Do you think the source and the speaker are trustworthy?
The speaker is Amanda Koontz and she is associate professor of Sociology at University of Central Florida. I think the speaker is trustworthy because she is an expert and capable enough to talk about this. I cannot find any sources in this video.
What the speaker’s attitude or tone towards the subject? Does he/she seem to agree or disagree with it? Explain your answer.
The speaker’s attitude is neutral towards the subject. I cannot find any statement which indicates about their position (agree or disagree) towards cancel culture.
Does the speaker put forward valid or strong arguments? How does he/she support the key points? Explain your answer.
I think it is valid enough because she is an expert. However, she did not provide enough data to support her argument.
Explain how this article will help contribute to your larger group project.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/03/t-magazine/cancel-culture-history.html