Cancelling your support for an artist implicated in sexual abuse allegations makes zero ethical difference to the world and does nothing for victims.
So says commentator, critical thinking and ethics lecturer Jacques Rousseau.
Rousseau says that muting artists such as R. Kelly and Michael Jackson, who have been accused of being sexual predators, cannot eliminate their influence on history and music.
He maintains that there is no ethical or moral argument for social media's so-called "cancel culture", where artists are written off for shady behaviour.
The danger of "cancel culture" is that it can tread on the side of performance, Rousseau explains.
He says expressing disapproval for an artist can be achieved while still consuming their work.
Rousseau adds that those who mute or "cancel" artist should not be selective in their outrage and disgust towards certain creative icons.
The artistic genius and the work can be assessed as stand-alone.— Jacques Rousseau, critical thinking and ethics lecturer - UCT
Michael Jackson's traces and impact are immeasurable. You can't eliminate that from history but there is great discomfort in listening to that music today.— Jacques Rousseau, critical thinking and ethics lecturer - UCT
I don't think I can do anything for the victims of Michael Jackson or any future victims by not listening to his music. It makes zero ethical difference to the world.— Jacques Rousseau, critical thinking and ethics lecturer - UCT
I don't see the ethical argument for not listening, I see the emotional argument for not listening.— Jacques Rousseau, critical thinking and ethics lecturer - UCT
Listen to the discussion on The Eusebius McKaiser Show: