In the last few weeks, there has been back-to-back drama in the YouTube community. A few weeks ago, the YouTube community was shook from sexual predator allegations against YouTube star, James Charles. James Charles lost about 3 million subscribers when fellow YouTube stars Tati Westbrook and Jeffree Star accused the 19-year-old of using his fame and wealth to manipulate other young men. After Charles lost a record-breaking number of subscribers, he was deemed by the public as "canceled."

After Charles posted a video titled, "No More Lies," and the scandal had cooled, fellow YouTuber Jaclyn Hill found herself in her own scandal. Hill launched a lipstick line for her new cosmetic company, known as both Jaclyn Cosmetics and Jaclyn Hill Cosmetics. She received backlash when consumers were finding holes, hairs, and beads in their melting lipsticks. After Hill uploaded an explanation video that was received with mixed reviews, many deemed her and her cosmetic line as canceled.

Many people have called out the general public for cancel culture. Many people criticize cancel culture for being a way for the public to bully online personalities. And yes, many people use these scandals as an excuse to send threats and bully others. However, cancel culture is the closest thing to holding those with power accountable I have ever seen. This kind of public pressure should not just be with online personalities, but companies across the board.

Now hear me out, if more companies felt that a public scandal could ruin their business we would see a lot less careless accidents. The problem is not cancel culture. The problem is that it needs to be re-directed from just social media influencers.

For example, Boeing's plane, the Boeing 737 Max, crashed and killed nearly 400 people, yet the public barely said a peep. The plane was crafted to make automatic nosedives. The pilots did not know of this feature and had no idea how to recover the plane from its automated state. A careless mistake on Boeing's part is responsible for an airborne titanic, yet the company has been able to move on rather unscathed.

In another example, driverless cars have been responsible for multiple deaths including Tesla, whose vehicle killed a 38-year-old California man. In a recent report by the National Transportation Safety Board, the driver was driving a driverless vehicle and on three separate situations, he attempted to take control back of the car. However, the Tesla continued in autopilot and crashed into a highway median after misreading highway lines which killed the driver. Tesla continues to push for its expansion in driverless vehicles, even after being sued by the driver's family.

In a third example, Fisher-Price had to recently recall 4.7 million "Rock n' Plays" after many infants died sleeping in them. The Rock n' Play went against safe sleeping guidelines put out by the American Pediatrics Association, due to the success of the product. Fisher Price put out that it was a user error, but upon further investigation, the Rock n' Play's incline was causing reflux in the infants and causing them to choke on their spit up. Even after the product caused fatalities, the company still sold the product. Nonetheless, parents across America sent their Rock N' Plays back in without any further questioning of the company and the safety of their products.

The point that I am getting at is that cancel culture is not the problem. Large companies are often reckless with their safety protocols and receive minimal backlash from the public. I do believe that accusations of being a sexual predator and selling unsafe lipsticks are serious accusations. Companies should have to answer to the public for their mistakes and should not be able to beta test products on consumers. The public should not have to feel bad because we question them. If they do not think about the public's well being, we should not feel guilty asking "why." Maybe cancel culture would not seem so outlandish if more companies were held responsible for their life-threatening actions.