The Internet and Diddy's Downfall (final draft)

-- By NilePierre - 11 Nov 24

Who is Diddy?

Sean Combs, also known as Diddy, is a Grammy-winning rapper, producer, and record label executive who has become a cultural icon and a music mogul. However, his legacy is now overshadowed by over 100 civil cases and criminal charges filed by the U.S. Attorney. These allegations include sexual assault, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice, dirtying his once sparkling public image.

Rumors Online and the Court of Public Opinion

As someone who grew up in Los Angeles, I’ve heard rumors of the dark side of Diddy’s white parties for years. Rumors once confined to beauty salons and barber shops now circulate through Twitter threads, videos, and online forums, gaining credibility and reach. Even before Cassie’s lawsuit against him in 2023, Reddit and other forums were already discussing Diddy’s alleged abusive behavior. For instance, a 2019 Reddit post of a video of Diddy’s former bodyguard with alleged firsthand accounts of his abuse got over 1,200 upvotes. Certainly, the internet has become a highway for not just intellectual, but social and cultural information to spread. It has also become a passageway to critique, analyze, and dismantle reputations piece by piece.

Cassie’s allegations mark a turning point where online whispers became lawsuits and opened the floodgates of legal action against Diddy. Still, it's important to recognize that these accusations exist in the same cultural landscape as infamous cases involving men like Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, and Roman Polanski. Unlike the minimal consequences faced by those who abused old hollywood pre-internet stars like Judy Garland, modern celebrities face swift judgment in the court of public opinion—a shift that speaks to how power dynamics have evolved through social media and cancel culture. The internet has enabled the public, particularly marginalized voices, to critique power more freely. But as history shows, the court of public opinion can have minimal effect in the real life consequences faced by perpetrators.

Shifting Power Dynamics

Social media platforms give ordinary people - especially women, people of color, and other marginalized communities- a way to critique powerful figures. While cancel culture can lead to transparency and public critique of bad actors, there is often a lack of followthrough. Looking at Donald Trump, who was just elected President despite being held liable for sexual abuse and faced a plethora of online criticism for his sexual misconduct, cancel culture only served as a superficial layer of justice.

In Diddy’s case, social media has amplified the voices of those most likely to be ignored by the traditional legal system. Many of his alleged victims are women of color, who have historically been underserved by institutions. Yet, the effectiveness of this online outcry is questionable when one considers how little has changed for other powerful figures who have faced similar allegations. Despite online backlash, some of the most powerful individuals accused of sexual crimes - Epstein, Trump, Polanski - either avoided legal repercussions or had delayed consequences after having lengthy careers filled with abusive behavior. While public opinion may shift due to social media, actual accountability is questionable.

Parasocial Monitoring and Data Collection

Social media has also intensified what we might call "parasocial monitoring," where fans follow celebrities’ lives as if they are part of them. The window into celebrities’ lives provided by social media is often curated to create a specific public image, reinforcing an illusion of intimacy. Parasocial relationships play a significant role in cancel culture, encouraging people to scrutinize every action of public figures like Diddy or even those loosely connected to him. Recently, celebrities like Steph Curry, Yung Miami, and Lebron James have unfollowed Diddy on instagram following his criminal charges, perhaps to publicly distance themselves and avoid online ridicule.

But there’s another layer: while we observe celebrities, we’re also being observed. Every click, share, and follow contributes to data on our online behavior and drives more engagement. In a way, the biggest social media platforms and websites rely on our parasocial monitoring and sensationalize celebrity scandals to draw in users. Just as social media has empowered public voices, it has also commodified our engagement, exploiting serious issues for clicks. What once was a source of empowerment is transformed into a profitable cycle of engagement.

Conclusion

Diddy’s story reflects a broader social question: can online platforms truly bring justice, or do they simply entrap us in an endless cycle that ultimately benefits harmful institutions? We should question if our online criticism actually translates to real world outcomes, or if being “canceled” is merely an illusion of power to subdue ordinary people.