Rhetorical Analysis

Alayna Pulley

English 1010

02/25/23

Is cancel culture silencing open debate by Hugh Breakey

Is cancel culture silencing open debate? Though many are familiar with the term cancel

culture, do we understand how deep it runs in our society? In the article “Is cancel culture

silencing open debate?” Hugh Breakey goes into detail about the consequences of shutting

down opinions we disagree with. Breakey's intended audience is anyone who values the right to

one's own opinion and is open-minded to innovative ideas. This article was written on July 10,

2020, and published by The Conversation. Breaky quotes in his article “Democracy itself

assumes citizens can hear different arguments, evidence and perspectives.” supporting the

main theme of Breakey’s article.

In the article “Is cancel culture silencing open debate?” Breakey examines real-life

scenarios where individuals such as celebrities, athletes, and politicians have been “canceled.”

Breakey goes into depth about the consequences of shutting down others' opinions and what

others' opinions can contribute to society. Breakey states “First, public deliberation is a source of

legitimacy.” meaning that opinions contribute to society's ways such as laws, rules, and

justifications. Celebrities and politicians have even described cancel culture as totalitarianism.

The article's purpose is to bring light to the value of others’ opinions, democracy, and to identify

the impact that cancel culture can have on society. Breakey effectively uses logos, pathos,

ethos, and even Kairos to support his claim that cancel culture is silencing debate.

Breaky uses logic throughout the article to support claims he makes by appealing to

logos in the writing. Breakey gives the example of JK Rowling and the backlash that followed
her comments “on transgender issues and womanhood.” Former cast members of Rowling's

movie, and employees of Rolwing have “refused to work on her forthcoming book.” after

Rowling made the comments. Rowling was then canceled by her peers and by the media. This

is an example of how Breakey supports his claims using logic and evidence. Breakey supplies

the reader with examples of cancel culture which helps the reader see the logic in Breakey's

argument. By Breakey using the example of Rowling the reader can see evidence of how

Breaky backs up his claims.

Another example of how Breakey appeals to logos in his writing is by including the

example “150 high-profile authors, commentators and scholars signed an open letter in Harper’s

magazine claiming that open debate and toleration of differences”. The authors are now under

attack and are being canceled by fellow peers, and the media. Breakey, including this number of

authors and their support for the cause, supports his claim of the mass impact cancel culture is

having on our society. Breakey Including this statistical number adds to the factual value of the

text and influences the logical aspect of the article. Including these statistics allowed Breakey to

build an argument, prove a statement, and support his ideas in the article.

An example of how Breaky appeals to pathos in his writing is when he gives

suggestions on how to approach offensive comments. Breaky states: “First evaluate the

comment the speech was morally wrongful, the speech was gravely offensive, the speech would

have seriously worried consequences. It was “unhelpful,” “harmful,” “damaging” or “divisive”.” By

Breaky giving these suggestions he is trying to help his reader understand the emotional appeal

of one's argument. Breaky tries to help the reader understand how to use their emotions to

respond to situations but also not letting their emotions entirely guide their reaction. Breaky tries

to help his readers understand when evaluating the situation before we react, our reaction can

be more accurate.
 Breakey also uses pathos in his writing when talking about how all types of topics are up

for debate. Breakey is inferring that just because something is emotional or offensive to you or

another does not mean that it cannot be up for discussion. Breakey says “(except in obvious

cases), claims about wrongfulness, offensiveness, and harmfulness are all open to debate.”

Breakey is saying that to have discussions and opinions we must risk being offensive so that

democracy continues. Breakey also states “Democracy itself assumes citizens can hear

different arguments, evidence, and perspectives.” In the segment, Breakey appeals to pathos by

saying to not let your emotions guide you but let your emotions guide you with logical intentions

inferring pathos.

The author of this article Hugh Breakey is well informed on the main idea of this article

“Is cancel culture silencing open debate?” Ethos is implied in Breakey's story by the author's

experience on the article's topic. Breaky is well-diverse in his academics as he is well-informed

in Political Philosophy, Ethics, International relations, Intellectual Property, and Property.

Breakey is also affiliated with Griffith University, making him a reliable source on this topic.

Breakey is a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Institute for Ethics, meaning that he would be

well-informed on the ideas of cancel culture. As a reader, knowing that this article's author is an

ethical and reliable writer can ensure that ethos is used in the text. Having an ethical writer

strengthens the credibility and persuasiveness of the writer's argument.

This article is meticulously written in accordance with an applicable timeline, because of

this the article appeals to Kairos. This article was written during a very controversial time when

censorship and canceled culture were at a peak. “Is cancel culture silencing open debate?”

written in 2020. In the year 2020, events such as the outbreak of COVID-19, and the death of

George Floyd took place. These events helped lead up to the cancel culture that is current to
this day. Breaky could have been affected by these events in some type of way. Through these

two events, questions were not up for discussion, and opinions were silenced. Breakey’s writing

was influenced by these events in some way that then affected this article.

In conclusion, “Is cancel culture silencing open debate?” Hugh Breakey writes an

effective article that displays distinct types of rhetoric. It displays ethos, pathos, logos, and even

Kairos clearly and correctly. Through analyzing this article, I have seen how to better use

rhetoric in my writing and have learned how to identify when diverse types of rhetoric are being

used. Breakey formatted his article so that rhetoric could be easily identifiable and applicable to

his topic. Breakey's purpose in this article is to help readers understand the cost of cancel

culture and the effect it can have on discussions.