MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 147
www.rsisinternational.org
An Examination of Colleen Ballinger’s Experience in Social Media:
Cancel Culture Chronicle
Tilagavati Subramaniam.,
Shaarviny Balakrishnan., Muthualagan Thangavelu
Quest International University (QIU)
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.923MIC3ST250012
Received: 12 August 2025; Accepted: 20 August 2025; Published: 24 October 2025
ABSTRACT
This study examined the rise of cancel culture through the lens of a famous YouTuber, Colleen Ballinger. This
unique culture was progressed after the release of her apology video on June 29, 2023, following allegations
and controversies with her previous video. A qualitative approach is used to investigate the public reactions on
her statement and the subsequent cancellation process. The data included thematic coding of 107 comments
left under the video, which were divided into positive and negative codes, as well as an analysis of social
media engagement rate with the help of a media analytic tool, Social Blade. According to the research
findings, Colleen's YouTube subscriber count significantly decreased between June and September 2023,
suggesting a reduction in withdrawal of support. However, there was a slight rise in video views, indicating
increasing public interest. 69 out of 107 comments were negative, according to the thematic coding, which
revealed most rejections for Colleen’s apology. The comments frequently emphasized her apology lacked
accountability. On the other hand, 38 responses criticized cancel culture and expressed empathy. The study
emphasized the effects of increased visibility and backlash that cancel culture has on public figures. The
findings highlight the value of sincerity, accountability, and appropriate ways to communicate in handling
public apologies and resolving online disputes. Future research should investigate extending the study's reach
to more platforms and analyzing the long-term consequences on the subject's reputation and professional
trajectory.
Keywords: Cancel Culture, Social Media, Social Media Influencer, Crisis Communication
INTRODUCTION
In today's digital age, social media has become a powerful tool that shapes how individuals interact,
communicate, and perceive others in society. Social media is a collection of software-based digital
technologies, such as websites and applications, that provide users with virtual places to exchange information,
material, and opinions within an online network. (Appel et al., 2020). The widespread use of these
technologies has connected over half of the global population and significantly transformed societal norms and
cultural interactions.
One of the more controversial phenomena emerging from this shift is cancel culture, a concept rooted in the
environment of Web 2.0 and fuelled by the rapid expansion of social media platforms (Haskell, 2021). Cancel
culture refers to the public rejection or boycott of individuals often celebrities, public figures, or influencers
who are deemed to have acted inappropriately or offensively. Unlike traditional forms of social accountability,
cancel culture is driven by user-generated content and amplified by digital virality, often resulting in
widespread public humiliation or backlash.
This cultural shift is particularly impactful in the context of social media influencers, who rely heavily on
public approval for their visibility, income, and brand partnerships (Chang et al., 2020). While these
influencers gain fame, credibility, and financial rewards, they are also more vulnerable to scrutiny and online
judgment. The phenomenon of cancel culture has thus become a pressing issue for influencers, whose online
personas are constantly evaluated by followers and critics alike.
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 148
www.rsisinternational.org
This study focuses on understanding cancel culture by examining a specific case involving American social
media influencer Colleen Ballinger. Known for her YouTube character Miranda Sings, Ballinger gained
international popularity with over 22 million followers across platforms. However, her career took a dramatic
turn following allegations that she had engaged in inappropriate and exploitative communication with minors.
The resulting backlash serves as a significant case study to explore how cancel culture manifests and escalates
on social media.
Despite the growing attention the term "cancel culture" receives in public discourse, scholarly research on the
topic especially in relation to social media influencers remains limited (Jaafar & Herna, 2023). Cancel culture
can result in profound consequences, ranging from damaged reputations to financial losses and mental health
impacts. In extreme cases, it has even contributed to suicides, such as that of British television presenter
Caroline Flack, highlighting the urgent need for a deeper understanding of this social dynamic (Blanchard,
2020).
This study seeks to analyze how cancel culture unfolds, with particular attention to its initiation, public
responses, and implications. The findings are expected to provide meaningful insights for influencers,
communication strategists, and digital media researchers on how to navigate online controversies and mitigate
reputational damage.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Cancel Culture and Social Media Influencers
Cancel culture is a phenomenon that typically originates on social media, characterized by the public
withdrawing support from public figures or organizations who are perceived to have acted offensively or made
unacceptable statements. This form of disengagement can range from ending support for an individual’s work
to public humiliation through insulting comments and social ostracization (Chiou, 2020). Scholars have
defined it in various ways, with some emphasizing the negative digital impression it leaves (Anderson-Lopez
et al., 2021), while others focus on the act of withdrawing support (Ng, 2020). Cancel culture often targets
public figures such as celebrities and influencers, particularly when issues of racism, sexism, or homophobia
are involved (Chiou, 2020; Clark, 2020; Ng, 2020). Unlike call-out culture, which highlights discrimination
and misconduct without targeting individuals, cancel culture aims at excluding the subject from the public
domain. Its roots lie in the black counter-publics movement, where marginalized voices sought social justice
(Clark, 2020). The concept is closely related to Thomas Mathiesen’s (1997) synopticon, where the masses
observe a few public figures, allowing social media to amplify scrutiny and accountability (Tucker, 2018;
Velasco, 2020).
Public Engagement and Influencer Dynamics
Cancel culture is more than just ceasing support it includes a variety of responses such as criticism, public
shaming, and financial consequences. When a public figure commits a controversial act, online criticism can
intensify, leading to mass unfollowing, brand disassociation, and termination of projects (Velasco, 2020).
Public participation in cancel culture often involves collecting "receipts" screenshots, videos, or posts to
validate accusations, which are then shared across platforms like gossip accounts and YouTube channels
(Lawson, 2020). Social media influencers, who gain fame by cultivating a digital following rather than through
traditional media, face amplified consequences in such scenarios (Jin, Muqaddam, & Ryu, 2019). These
influencers are defined by their ability to shape followers’ behaviors and attitudes while maintaining a large
and engaged audience (De Veirman et al., 2017; Chang et al., 2020). Negative engagement behaviors, such as
criticism or content co-destruction, can drastically alter an influencer’s image and career (Dolan et al., 2015).
Crisis Management and Strategic Communication
In response to cancel culture, influencers often attempt damage control, yet their strategies can backfire.
Tactics like issuing apologies via Instagram Stories or manipulating platform algorithms to limit exposure may
be seen as insincere or evasive (Lawson, 2020). If not handled with authenticity and social responsibility, these
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 149
www.rsisinternational.org
efforts can escalate the backlash (Johnson, 2021). Crisis communication on social media demands careful
strategy, involving timely, appropriate messaging, monitoring, and adapting to platform-specific dynamics
(Eriksson, 2018). Transparent and interactive responses are more likely to gain public trust (Du Plessis, 2018).
Despite the affordances of digital tools, the mismanagement of crises as in Colleen Ballinger’s case
demonstrates how a lack of genuine engagement can intensify reputational damage.
Case Overview and Theoretical Framework
Colleen Ballinger rose to fame through her character Miranda Sings and successfully transitioned into
mainstream entertainment with her Netflix show "Haters Back Off." However, her career was derailed by
allegations of inappropriate conduct, particularly with a minor, which culminated in a widely criticized ukulele
apology video. This incident exemplifies how influencers mishandling crises can face intensified cancel
culture responses. To analyze her case, two theoretical frameworks are used: The Situational Crisis
Communication Theory (SCCT) and Image Repair Theory (IRT). SCCT suggests that crisis responses must
align with the crisis type, audience perception, and severity, which helps to evaluate Ballinger’s failed strategy
(Coombs, 2007). Simultaneously, IRT outlines strategies such as denial, blame-shifting, and minimization
(Benoit, 1997), many of which Ballinger employed. However, these strategies did not resonate with the
audience, emphasizing the importance of context-appropriate and sincere communication efforts in mitigating
public backlash.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study employed a qualitative single-case design to examine the public's reaction to cancel culture through
the lens of Colleen Ballinger’s controversial YouTube apology video posted on 29 June 2023. The qualitative
approach enabled an in-depth exploration of user responses, focusing on the complexities of emotions, tone,
and attitudes expressed in online commentary. Thematic analysis was applied as the main analytic method,
allowing the identification and interpretation of patterns in the collected data. A total of 107 comments were
purposively sampled based on their relevance to the study's objectives, with NVivo software used for thematic
visualization and Social Blade analytics applied to assess public engagement levels, such as views and
subscriber trends.
The sampling involved extracting top user comments from the video, which had gained over 13,000 responses,
using criteria based on positive and negative operational definitions. Positive comments were identified by
supportive language, empathetic tones, and critiques of cancel culture, while negative comments reflected
hostility, rejection of the apology, or calls for accountability. To enhance reliability, the coding process was
guided by a structured codebook, and investigator triangulation was applied by engaging a faculty expert to
validate the coded dataset. Ethical considerations were maintained by anonymizing commenter identities while
retaining the authenticity of their words.
The data analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic process: preparation, transcription,
familiarization, coding, triangulation, and report production. Manual coding of the comments was supported
by clear operational definitions, and examples were included to demonstrate how comments were classified.
This methodological rigor allowed for nuanced insights into how users interpreted Ballinger’s apology and
how their reactions reflected broader societal sentiments on accountability and cancel culture. The final report
presents the key themes and findings that emerged from this analysis, offering implications for understanding
digital responses in high-profile controversies.
Data Analysis
The data were analyzed using a thematic coding approach. The data analysis process consists of six phases that
were outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006) and Braun and Clarke (2021) as well as Lester et al. (2020).
Phase 1: Preparation and organization of Data
A total of 107 comments were manually copied to a word document from Colleen Ballinger’s apology video
on YouTube. Each comment was listed in a table with separate columns for the username and total number of
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 150
www.rsisinternational.org
likes for the comment. The document was then labeled as a comments list. (Refer to Appendix A for the
document)
Phase 2: Transcription of Data
Colleen Ballinger’s apology video was transcribed using an online transcript extractor software (Genelify) to
save time and then copied into a word document. The transcribe is then read meticulously in order to
understand the context of the comments during data analysis. (Refer to Appendix D for the transcribe)
Phase 3: Familiarizing with the information
Every comment taken from YouTube is read and re-read, noting down the first thoughts in a copy of the
comments list (Appendix A) that was already prepared with an additional column added as notes. (Refer to
Appendix B for the document). Then the notes are used to guide the next phase of the data analysis process.
Phase 4: Generating and organizing Codes
The operationalization of positive and negative comments shown in table 1 & table 2 are then used as a
codebook to assist in the deductive coding process. Each comment was coded into positive or negative based
on the criteria that were set for each code as predetermined in the operationalization. To ensure the data was
organized well and to avoid any confusion, the same comment list (Appendix B) that contained the initial
thoughts about the comments were used to classify the comment into positives and negatives. (Refer to
Appendix C for the coded data) Below are a few examples of how each comment was analyzed and coded as
positive or negative.
Example 1
Commenter I :
“this is definitely an odd way of apologizing, but it seems genuine and i feel bad for her”
Tone of Speech:
The comment has a supportive tone as the commenter used “genuine” to describe it. Through recognising the
sincerity of the apology, the comment expresses support for it.
Type of Reaction:
Did not show any hostility, defense, or insulting remarks. Instead, it conveys a personal and compassionate
reaction
Reaction to Apology:
"I feel bad for her" is a statement that expresses empathy. This shows that Colleen's attempt at an apology was
met with a pleasant and understanding attitude.
Mention of Withdrawal of Support:
The statement does not imply withdrawal of support. However, the sympathetic remark "I feel bad for her"
denotes neutrality or continuous assistance.
In general, the comment meets the criteria for a positive comment, based on operational definitions as shown
in Table 1 with its encouraging tone, empathic attitude, and positive response to the apologies. Hence, it was
coded as positive.
Example 2
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 151
www.rsisinternational.org
Commenter II :
“Spot on. Cancel culture is so dumb, just a bunch of people getting high on hating together I truly enjoy
your content as one of the last youtubers that still dares to share as much as you do. And as an awkward person
myself, its so sad and scary how people gang up and prescribe intent behind other peoples actions, and defense
seems futile =\ I hope that hate won't win this time ”
Tone of Speech
Generally, the tone is encouraging and sympathetic towards Collen. The commenter shows appreciation for her
courage as well as love of her content.
Type of Reaction
Criticizing people who participate in cancel culture and displays empathy and support for Colleen.
Call for Action
It is implied that action is necessary in the hope that "hate won't win this time." The commenter is in favor of a
less hostile and more understanding stance.
Mention of Cancel Culture
The comment specifically calls out cancel culture, calling it "dumb" and fueled by a general hatred. This
satisfies the criteria for criticizing cancel culture for exaggerating issues.
Mention of Withdrawal of Support
With an encouraging attitude and no plans to revoke support, the comment demonstrates ongoing admiration
and support for Colleen.
In general, this comment satisfies the requirements for a positive comment by displaying a tone that is
sympathetic and encouraging, criticizing cancel culture, pushing for continuous support and understanding as
well as offering hope that hate and negativity will fail. Thus, coded as positive.
Phase 5: Investigator triangulation of Data
According to Noble & Heale (2019), triangulation lowers any potential bias of the researcher while increasing
the credibility and validity of findings. Hence, after all the data gathered was coded by the researcher, a copy
of the document containing the comment list along with the operational definitions used to code the data was
sent to a lecturer from the faculty of social sciences to be examined to get an outside perspective to validate the
researcher's coding. (Refer to Appendix E)
Phase 6: Producing Report
All the information collected from the data analysis are then presented in the following chapters, providing
evidence and justifications to support the classification of codes (Braun and Clarke, 2006, Braun and Clarke,
2021).
FINDING
The findings include data derived from thematic analysis of YouTube comments as well as social media
analytics, specifically focusing on engagement metrics such as subscriber and view counts. The results
interpreted in relation to existing literature and theoretical frameworks, shedding light on the public's
perception of the apology and the broader implications of cancel culture.
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 152
www.rsisinternational.org
Social Media (YouTube) Engagement Rate
Figure I: Social Blade analytics of subscriber and video view trends on Colleen Ballinger’s YouTube channel
The engagement trends for Colleen Ballinger's YouTube channel were assessed by using the Social Blade. (
social media analytics platform). Based on the figure 1, there is a notable decline in her subscriber count from
June to September 2023. This decline corresponds with the timeline of public allegations and her apology
video which was published on June 29, 2023. Despite the subscriber loss, video views experienced a modest
increase during the same period, suggesting heightened attention to her content in the aftermath of the
controversy.
This contrast indicates that while many users chose to unfollow the influencer, others remained engaged,
possibly to scrutinize her response or follow the ongoing discourse surrounding the scandal.
Social Media (YouTube) Engagement Analysis
The engagement trends captured by Social Blade reveal a significant drop in subscriber numbers during the
controversy, which suggests that many followers withdrew their support—a hallmark of cancel culture. This
aligns with Dunlap (2023), who noted that public backlash often manifests through unfollowing or
unsubscribing.
Interestingly, despite the decline in subscribers, there was a slight increase in video views. Amalia and
Mohammad (2023) suggested that increased views typically correlate with rising subscribers, yet this study
observed the opposite. This paradox is characteristic of cancel culture, where controversy can amplify
visibility even as it erodes support. The spike in views may reflect a combination of curiosity, criticism, and
continued public interest.
Thematic Coding
Fig II: Distribution of positive vs. negative YouTube comments, visualized via NVivo
After manually coding YouTube comments using a deductive thematic approach the data was uploaded to
NVivo software for visualization. As illustrated in Bar Chart 1, of the 107 analyzed comments, 68 were
negative and 39 were positive. This indicates a predominantly critical reception from the public regarding
Colleen Ballinger’s apology video.
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 153
www.rsisinternational.org
Thematic Analysis of Comments
The thematic analysis reveals that the majority of the comments were negative. Many commenters expressed
dissatisfaction with the tone and content of Ballinger’s apology, describing it as insincere and deflective. Some
comments mocked her delivery, such as:
•“Girl when’s this dropping on Spotify?”
This sarcastic remark reflects disapproval of her musical approach to the apology.
Others offered more serious critiques:
•“She only feels sorry for herself. What about the affected children?! Not an ounce of accountability in this
‘apology’ video…”
Such comments demonstrate public expectation for accountability and genuine remorse, particularly in cases
involving serious allegations.
Another recurring sentiment was disappointment:
•“All I can think about is the victims watching this. I can't believe this.”.
These responses align with Chiou (2020), who identified a pattern where cancel culture leads to harsh public
reactions, including mockery, criticism, and disengagement from influencers perceived as morally
compromised.
On the other hand, a minority of comments expressed support, sympathy, or criticism of cancel culture itself.
For instance:
•“This song is taken as insensitive, but knowing Colleen, it’s her way of showing she cares.”
Another comment stated:
•“Cancel culture is horrible. There is no way that she is a groomer, she has children herself. I don’t get it.”
These comments reveal that despite a predominantly negative sentiment, there remains a subset of supporters
who value forgiveness, context, or are sceptical of cancel culture practices. Karg, Lim, and Schnall (2022)
suggest that highly devoted fans may revise their moral assessments to preserve a favourable view of the
influencer, even in the face of serious accusations—often as a mechanism to reduce cognitive dissonance.
DISCUSSION
The data underscores the profound impact of cancel culture on public figures. The significant decline in
subscribers and the wave of critical comments reflect the immediate consequences of public backlash. Chiou
(2020) found similar outcomes in prior studies, where social media scandals led to mass unfollowing and
online condemnation.
The findings also emphasize the importance of authentic and accountable crisis communication. The negative
public response was primarily driven by perceptions that Colleen Ballinger’s apology lacked sincerity and
responsibility. This aligns with Du Plessis (2018), who argued that audiences are more receptive to
organizations and individuals who engage in transparent and interactive communication during a crisis.
While most comments were critical, a minority voiced empathy or opposition to cancel culture. This diversity
of opinion highlights the need for public figures to consider varied audience expectations. A one-size-fits-all
approach to crisis communication may not be effective, especially when different segments of the audience
respond differently based on personal values, loyalty, or perceptions of fairness.
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 154
www.rsisinternational.org
CONCLUSION
This research explored the cancellation of Colleen Ballinger by analyzing public responses to her apology
video through qualitative thematic analysis and social media engagement data. The results revealed a
noticeable drop in her YouTube subscriber count during the controversy, despite a slight increase in video
views—indicating the complex dual nature of cancel culture, where public figures may experience both
heightened scrutiny and increased visibility.
From the 107 comments analyzed, the majority (68) were negative, while 39 were positive. Thematic findings
highlighted widespread dissatisfaction with her apology, often perceived as insincere and inadequate. These
observations align with Coombs’ (2007) Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT), which posits that
crisis communication strategies must be tailored to the context and severity of the issue. The study suggests
that Ballinger’s response did not adequately address the public's expectations or the nature of the allegations,
thereby failing to restore trust with her audience.
The findings underscore the importance of authentic, accountable, and timely communication during crisis
situations. They also reveal the paradox of cancel culture: while it can damage reputation and support, it may
simultaneously drive engagement. This dual effect has important implications for how influencers and public
figures navigate online backlash.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This publication is supported by Quest International University under the QIU Academic Publication Funding.
The authors also acknowledge the use of AI tools, including ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot, to assist in
refining the grammar and clarity of this manuscript.
REFERENCES
1. Alafwan, Siallagan, & Utomo. (2023). Comments analysis on social media: A review. ICST
Transactions on Scalable Information Systems. Advance online publication.
2. Amalia, S. I., & Mohammad, W. (2023). Analysis of the effect of the number of views and number of
videos on the number of virtual YouTuber subscribers in Vietnam. Himeka: Journal of Interdisciplinary
Social Sciences, 1(1), 108-114. https://journal.chishikinh.my.id/index.php/himeka/article/view/23
3. Appel, G., Grewal, L., Hadi, R., T.Stephen, A. (2020). The future of social media in marketing. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(1), 79–95 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00695-1
4. Arora, A., Bansal, S., Kandpal, C., Aswani, R., & Dwivedi, Y. (2019). Measuring social media
influencer index-insights from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 49, 86-101.
5. Bhandari, P. (2020, June 12). What is quantitative research? | Definition, uses & methods. Scribbr.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/quantitative-research/
6. Blanchard, P. (2020, February 16). Caroline Flack's death shows 'cancel culture' has to stop – and it's
up to us to stop it. City A.M.https://www.cityam.com/caroline-flacks-death-shows-cancel-culture-has-
to-stop-and-its-up-to-us-to-stop-it/
7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis.Qualitative
Psychology, 9(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000196
9. Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., Bywaters, D., & Walker,
K. (2020). Purposive sampling: Complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in
Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
10. Caulfield, J. (2019, September 6). How to do thematic analysis | Step-by-step guide & examples.
Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/thematic-analysis/
11. Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of
triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545-547.
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 155
www.rsisinternational.org
12. Chang, S.-C., Wang, C.-C., & Chia-Yu, K. (2020). Social media influencer research: A biometric
analysis. International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies, 11(2), 75–86.
13. Cheng, Y. (2018). How social media is changing crisis communication strategies: Evidence from the
updated literature. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(1), 58–68.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12130
14. Chiou, R. (2020). We need deeper understanding about the neurocognitive mechanisms of moral
righteousness in an era of online vigilantism and cancel culture. AJOB Neuroscience, 11(4), 297–299.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21507740.2020.1830872
15. Clark, M. (2020). DRAG THEM: A brief etymology of so-called “cancel culture”.Communication and
the Public, 5(3-4), 88–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047320961562
16. De Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram influencers: The
impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of
Advertising, 36(5), 798–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035
17. Dodgson, L. (2020, February 25). The toxic, tragic results of online hate, bullying, and cancel culture.
Business Insider.https://www.businessinsider.com/toxic-tragic-results-of-online-hate-bullying-ca ncel-
culture-2020-2
18. Du Plessis, C. (2018). Social media crisis communication: Enhancing a discourse of renewal through
dialogic content. Public Relations Review, 44(5), 829–838.
19. Dunlap, A. (2023, October 15). Opinion | It's time to recognize the toxicity of cancel culture. The
Crimson White. https://thecrimsonwhite.com/111324/opinion/opinion-its-time-to-recognize-the-
toxicity-of-cancel-culture/
20. Enke, N., & Borchers, N. (2019). Social media influencers in strategic communication: A conceptual
framework for strategic social media influencer communication. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 13(4), 261-277.
21. Eriksson, M. (2018). Lessons for crisis communication on social media: A systematic review of what
research tells the practice. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(5), 526–551.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1510405
22. Ferrey, A., Ashworth, G., Cabling, M., Rundblad, G., & Ismail, K. (2023). A thematic analysis of
YouTube comments on a television documentary titled ‘Diabulimia: The world's most dangerous eating
disorder’. Diabetic Medicine, 40, e15025. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.15025
23. Gerrie, V. (2019). The diet prada effect: ‘Call-out culture’ in the contemporary fashionscape. Clothing
Cultures, 6(1), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1386/cc_00006_1
24. Hamid, S. N. A., Ahmad, N., Saraih, U. N., Hamzah, M. R., & Ariffin, K. H. K. (2023). Social
mediated crisis communication model: A solution for social media crisis? AIP Conference
Proceedings, 2544, 050013. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0120756
25. Hassan, S. A. (2021, March 23). Why Cancel Culture By Anyone Is Harmful and Wrong. Psychology
Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-mind/202103/why-cancel- culture-anyone-
is-harmful-and-wrong
26. Hornmoen, H., & Backholm, K. (2018). Social media use in crises and risks: An introduction to the
collection. In H. Hornmoen & K. Backholm (Eds.), Social Media Use in Crisis and Risk
Communication (pp. 1–12). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78756-269-
120181018
27. Jaafar, G., & Herna, H. (2023). The impact of media in cancel culture phenomenon. Jurnal Komunikasi
Ikatan Sarjana Komunikasi Indonesia, 8(2), 382-390. https://doi.org/10.25008/jkiski.v8i2.893
28. Jin, S. V., Muqaddam, A., & Ryu, E. (2019). Instafamous and social media influencer marketing.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 37(5), 567–579.
29. Johnson, A. (2021, July 6). Influencer Apologies All Sound The Same For A Reason.Her
Campus.https://www.hercampus.com/culture/influencer-apology-video-trend-youtube/
30. Jusay, J. L. A., Lababit, J. A. S., Moralina, L. O. M., & Ancheta, J. R. (2022). We are cancelled:
Exploring victims’ experiences of cancel culture on social media in the Philippines. Rupkatha Journal
on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 14(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21659/rupkatha.v14n4.04
31. Haskell, S. (2021). Cancel culture: A qualitative analysis of the social media practice of canceling.
Boise State University. https://www.proquest.com/openview/ c06453462fb8cd69c401cced66598d4b/
1?p q-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 156
www.rsisinternational.org
32. Khasawneh, A., Chalil Madathil, K., Dixon, E., Wiśniewski, P., Zinzow, H., & Roth, R. (2020).
Examining the self-harm and suicide contagion effects of the blue whale challenge on YouTube and
Twitter: qualitative study. JMIR mental health, 7(6), e15973
33. Kim, M., & Kim, J. (2020). How does a celebrity make fans happy? Interaction between celebrities and
fans in the social media context. Computers in Human Behavior, 111, 106419.
34. King, C. M., & McCashin, D. (2022). Commenting and connecting: A thematic analysis of responses to
YouTube vlogs about borderline personality disorder. *Internet Interventions, 28*, 100540.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2022.100540
35. Kleinheksel, A. J., Rockich-Winston, N., Tawfik, H., & Wyatt, T. R. (2020). Demystifying content
analysis. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(1), Article 7113.
https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7113
36. Koltsova, O., & Nagornyy, O. (2019). Redefining media agendas: Topic problematization in online
reader comments. Media and Communication, 7(3), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i3.1894
37. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage
Publications.https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=nE1aDwAAQ BAJ&oi=fnd&pg=
PP1&dq=Krippendorff,+K.+(2018).+Content+analysis:+An+ introduction+to+its+methodology. +Sage
+Publications.&ots=y_8eWvjTev&sig= OvdXA4aPr-1ZJzZrWthub442KMc#v= onepage&q=
Krippendorff%2C%20K.% 20(2018).%20Content%20analysis%3A %20An%20introduction%20 to
%20its% 20methodology.%20Sage%20Publications.&f=false
38. Lawson, C. E. (2020). Skin deep: Callout strategies, influencers, and racism in the online beauty
community. New Media and Society. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820904697
39. Lazar, J., Feng, J. H., & Hochheiser, H. (2017). Research methods in human-computer interaction (2nd
ed.). Morgan Kaufmann.
40. Lester, J. N., Cho, Y., & Lochmiller, C. R. (2020). Learning to do qualitative data analysis: A starting
point. Human Resource Development Review, 19(1), 94–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484320903890
41. Luo, A. (2019, August 23). Critical discourse analysis | Definition, guide & examples. Scribbr.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/discourse-analysis/
42. Mackson, S. B., Brochu, P. M., & Schneider, B. A. (2019). Instagram: Friend or foe? The application’s
association with psychological well-being. New Media & Society, 21(10), 2160–2182.
43. McCombes, S. (2021, June 7). What is a research design | Types, guide & examples. Scribbr.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-design/
44. Miller, E. D. (2018). Content analysis of YouTube comments from differing videos: An overview and
key methodological considerations. SAGE Publications Ltd.
45. Ng, E. (2020). No grand pronouncements here..: Reflections on cancel culture and digital media
participation. Television and New Media, 21(6), 621–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476420918828
46. Nikolopoulou, K. (2022, August 11). What is purposive sampling? | Definition & examples. Scribbr.
https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/purposive-sampling/
47. Noble, H., & Heale, R. (2019). Triangulation in research, with examples. Evidence Based Nursing,
22(3), 67–68. https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2019-103145
48. Oksanen, A., Garcia, D., Sirola, A., Näsi, M., Kaakinen, M., Keipi, T., & Räsänen, P. (2015). Pro-
anorexia and anti-pro-anorexia videos on YouTube: Sentiment analysis of user responses. Journal of
Medical Internet Research, 17(11), e256. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5007
49. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015).
Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation
research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-
013-0528-y
50. Pereira de Sá, S., & Pereira Alberto, T. (2021). Bigmouth strikes again: The controversies of Morrissey
and cancel culture. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642211042291
51. Rabouin, T., Over, R., & August, W. (2021). “Cancel culture”, a rhetorical construction. Generation for
Rights Over the World, August, 1–14.
52. Rahmawati, S. D., & Dwiyanti, A. R. (2023). The phenomenon of Cancel Culture Its Effects on
MIC3ST 2025 | International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS)
Virtual Conference on Melaka International Social Sciences, Science and Technology 2025
ISSN: 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Special Issue | Volume IX Issue XXIII October 2025
Page 157
www.rsisinternational.org
Individuals Within Ordinary Segments of Society. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/fkgna
53. Su, L. Y. F., Xenos, M. A., Rose, K. M., Wirz, C., Scheufele, D. A., & Brossard, D. (2018). Uncivil
and personal? Comparing patterns of incivility in comments on the Facebook pages of news outlets.
New Media and Society, 20(10), 3678–3699. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818757205
54. Tao, L., & Jacobs, L. (2019). "Inbox me, please": Analyzing comments on anonymous Facebook posts
about depression and suicide. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 29(5), 491–498.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2019.1665903
55. Teh, P. L., Ooi, P. B., Chan, N. N., & Chuah, Y. K. (2018). A comparative study of the effectiveness of
sentiment tools and human coding in sarcasm detection. Journal of Systems and Information
Technology, 20(3), 358–374. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-12-2017-0120
56. Thelwall, M. (2018). Can museums find male or female audiences online with YouTube? Aslib Journal
of Information Management, 70(5), 481–497. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-06-2018-0146
57. Thomas, F. B. (2022). The role of purposive sampling technique as a tool for informal choices in social
sciences research methods. https://justagriculture.in/files/newsletter/2022/ january/47.%20 The %20
Role%20 of%20Purposive%20Sampling%20 Technique%20as %20a%20Tool%20for%20I nformal
%20Choices%20in%20a%20Social%20Sciences%20in%20Research%2 0Methods.pdf
58. Tucker, B. (2018). ‘That s problematic’: Tracing the birth of call-out culture. Critical Reflections: A
Student Journal on Contemporary Sociological Issues, 1–5.
59. Velasco, J. C. (2020). You are cancelled: Virtual collective consciousness and the emergence of cancel
culture as ideological purging. Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 12(5), 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.21659/RUPKATHA.V12N5.RIOC1S21N2
60. Voorveld, H., Noort, G., Muntinga, D., & Bronner, F. (2018). Engagement with social media and social
media advertising: The differentiating role of platform type. Journal of Advertising, 47(1), 1-17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2017.1405754
61. Verwer, F. (2018, June). Striking the right note on social media during a tragic crisis: The situational
crisis communication theory applied to the case of the Germanwings Flight U9525 and its effects on
audience response tone. [Master's thesis, University of Twente]. http://essay.utwente.nl/75165/
62. Yousefi Nooraie, R., Sale, J. E. M., Marin, A., & Ross, L. E. (2020). Social network analysis: An
example of fusion between quantitative and qualitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
14(1), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818804060
