Cancel culture: why generation Z & Alpha targeted J.K. Rowling

The controversy that shook a generation

“Hogwarts should be a safe place for all children. J.K. Rowling ruined that.” In 2020, this comment flooded social media as the world’s most famous author faced a backlash that few could have predicted. After tweeting her views on gender identity, Rowling was accused of transphobia, leading to calls for a boycott of her books, movies, and merchandise. Fans burned her books, fellow celebrities distanced themselves, and #RIPJKRowling trended worldwide.

The creator of Harry Potter, a symbol of magic and inclusivity, was suddenly cast as a villain. But how did it come to this? How did a single tweet spark such outrage? And is this public shaming a quest for justice or a dangerous form of censorship?

What is “cancel culture”?

Cancel culture, also known as digital shaming or public accountability, is withdrawing support from public figures or companies after they have done or said something considered objectionable. It often involves public shaming, boycotts, and social media campaigns.

Historically, social boycotts were protest tools, from the Montgomery Bus Boycott during the civil rights movement to boycotting apartheid in South Africa. But with social media, cancel culture has taken on a new form—digital ostracism that is swift, viral, and often unforgiving.

According to a 2024 Eurobarometer* survey, 68% of young Europeans have participated in a cancel culture campaign, while 55% believe it can go too far and threaten free speech. This statistic highlights the delicate balance between accountability and censorship in the digital age.

Why does Generation ZAlpha embrace cancel culture?

For Generation ZAlpha, cancel culture is more than public shaming; it’s a way to demand ethical consistency and challenge social norms. This generation grew up in a world of political activism online—witnessing #MeToo, #BlackLivesMatter, and LGBTQ+ rights movements unfold on TikTok, Instagram, and Twitter. They see “cancel culture” as a way to amplify marginalized voices and challenge power structures.

But it’s also about identity. Gen ZAlpha constructs identity through digital communities and social activism. Seeing someone like Rowling—an icon of their childhood—express views they perceive as harmful feels personal. They feel betrayed, and they react by revoking their support.

Cancel culture vs. free speech: accountability or censorship?

The backlash against J.K. Rowling sparked a fierce debate on free speech. For her critics, canceling Rowling was about accountability—using social pressure to demand responsibility for words that could harm vulnerable communities. For her supporters, it was about freedom of expression and the right to hold controversial opinions without fear of public shaming.

This isn’t just a debate about one author; it’s a cultural divide. For Generation ZAlpha, words are powerful, and harmful speech must be challenged. For older generations, even offensive speech deserves protection under free speech principles. This generational clash reflects different understandings of power, privilege, and social responsibility.

A sociological analysis: generational values and digital justice

Cancel culture exposes a generational divide in values. For Generation ZAlpha, it’s about protecting marginalized communities and holding public figures accountable. For older generations, it’s about preserving free speech and the right to be controversial.

This isn’t just about canceling people; it’s about who gets to decide what’s acceptable and offensive. Social media platforms amplify these divisions. Algorithms feed users content that reinforces their beliefs, creating echo chambers where outrage grows unchecked. In this digital battleground, public figures are judged for their actions, words, beliefs, and associations.

Is cancel culture here to stay?

J.K. Rowling wasn’t canceled in the traditional sense—her books still sell millions, and her legacy remains influential. But her public image is forever changed. Cancel culture isn’t about erasing people; it’s about redefining who gets to influence culture. It’s about power, justice, and who controls the narrative.

As society grapples with changing social norms, the challenge lies in balancing accountability with freedom of expression, ensuring that digital justice does not silence dialogue but enriches it.