Marketing
The Cancel Culture: Lessons For African Brands From Unpredictable Consumers
By Walter Nyabundi
Cancel Culture: A Modern Paradox
Cancel culture has become a buzzword in modern discourse- a social phenomenon where individuals or brands are publicly shamed and boycotted for perceived moral failings. It thrives on outrage, amplified by social media, and often feels like a cultural reckoning. But beneath the surface lies a paradox: cancel culture is rarely absolute, and its sustainability as a mechanism for accountability- especially for brands- is questionable.
This article explores why cancel culture falters when confronted with irrational consumer behaviour, using examples from the entertainment industry and drawing lessons for African brands navigating today’ s volatile landscape. African brands like Safaricom and MTN prove that value trumps virtue signalling eventually.
The Entertainment Paradox: Selective Outrage and Cultural Memory
Consider the entertainment world, where cancel culture first gained traction. Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, and Sean Combs have faced widespread condemnation for their transgressions. Their reputations are in tatters, and their careers have suffered irreparable damage. Fans abandoned them, streaming platforms removed their content, and brands severed ties. In these cases, the public response feels justified- serious crimes demand accountability.
Yet, the same consumers who champion cancel culture still stream Michael Jackson’ s music, despite allegations that tarnished his legacy. His songs dominate playlists, his albums continue to sell, and his cultural influence remains intact. Why?
This inconsistency reveals a truth: consumer behaviour is rarely rational. Emotional attachment, nostalgia, and perceived cultural value often override moral outrage. People compartmentalize- condemning the individual while continuing to consume the art. If cancel culture were absolute, Jackson’ s music would have vanished from playlists worldwide. It has not.
The paradox is clear: cancellation is selective, shaped by personal convenience and emotional investment. Outrage peaks online but fizzles offline when it collides with ingrained habits and cultural significance.
What This Means for African Brands
Brands, unlike individuals, are collective entities. They represent values, but they also deliver utility- products and experiences consumers rely on. When brands misstep, the instinct to cancel often collides with practical reality. Consumers might tweet outrage, but will they abandon a product that meets their critical needs or offers unmatched convenience? Rarely.
Take Safaricom, Kenya’ s telecom giant. Over the years, it has faced criticism- from data pricing concerns to service outages. Social media hashtags like # BoycottSafaricom have trended, yet the company remains dominant. Why? Because Safaricom delivers essential connectivity and mobile money services that consumers cannot easily replace.
Similarly, MTN in Nigeria has weathered storms of public outrage over tax disputes and regulatory issues. Calls for boycotts surged, but MTN’ s subscriber base continued to grow. Convenience and reliability trumped moral signalling.
Cancel culture promises moral clarity but delivers selective enforcement. It thrives on outrage, not consistency. Consumers cancel when it is convenient, forgive when it is costly, and forget when novelty fades. This volatility makes cancel culture an unreliable mechanism for accountability- especially for brands.
Even in FMCG, Shoprite faced backlash during xenophobic attacks in South Africa, with activists calling for boycotts of South African brands across Africa. Yet, Shoprite stores remain busy in Lagos and Lusaka. Why? Because affordability and accessibility matter more than hashtags when consumers make real-world choices.
The Psychology Behind Cancel Culture
Cancel culture assumes consumers function as moral gatekeepers. Truthfully, they are simply emotional
22 MAL70 / 26 ISSUE