The Concept of the “Public Square”

There’s much to unpack regarding whether social media serves as a public square or a new iteration of one, particularly as platforms like TikTok evolve the dynamics of public discourse. For the purpose of this discussion, let’s assume it is indeed a public square where individuals can freely share information and engage in discourse.

This digital space has also emerged as a platform for cancel culture. I envision it as a village center where villagers publicly confront those deemed scoundrels, leaving their judgments for all to see.

Social media has proven invaluable for holding individuals, especially those in power, accountable for their actions. Recently, I came across a TikTok from a former employee exposing workplace conditions at a tech company, reminiscent of past BuzzFeed employee testimonies.

The #MeToo movement is another powerful testament to how social media has enabled victims of abuse to share their stories and seek accountability.

However, when it comes to public condemnation, there are varying degrees of severity. Based on TikTok videos, West Elm Caleb’s actions raise red flags, yet they do not equate to abuse.

This raises an important question: does he truly deserve the public shaming, or has he merely become an unwitting participant in TikTok’s viral phenomena?

Many comments on #WestElmCaleb TikToks suggest that he does merit the public scrutiny he is receiving. In a world where anything can become public fodder, it’s not surprising when personal actions attract attention. There’s a familiar argument that those who share their lives online should be prepared for criticism, echoing the warnings from our parents about internet privacy.

Nevertheless, when is it appropriate to expose someone’s private information publicly?

Where do we draw the line between those guilty of serious wrongdoing, as highlighted by the #MeToo movement, and individuals who may simply exhibit questionable behavior?

Finding that line can often be challenging, and the answer isn’t clear.

Many TikTok users sharing their experiences with West Elm Caleb have since called for an end to doxing attempts.

Some have noted that while the exposure of West Elm Caleb’s actions may have crossed a line with the release of his personal details, it has also shed light on a broader issue regarding problematic behaviors exhibited by men on dating apps.

The TikTok influencer who first mentioned West Elm Caleb emphasized that women expressing their concerns are often labeled as overreacting or irrational.

“People finally felt compelled to expose bad behavior and hold someone accountable,” noted TikTok user [at]Meemshou, who referenced a BuzzFeed article that downplayed Caleb's actions.

One of social media's strengths lies in its capacity for self-expression, creativity, and social interaction, enabling discussions about pressing social issues like those raised in this case.

The virality of West Elm Caleb’s alleged conduct has prompted conversations about the challenges women face in the dating landscape, including the normalization of “love bombing,” which I had not previously recognized.

However, given the speed with which information spreads on TikTok, driven by its engagement-focused algorithm, we must reconsider the kind of public square we are cultivating.

What actions warrant public exposure, and what do not? Are we contributing to virality for the sake of empowerment, or do we seek meaningful change? How might our actions impact others? Is it justified to intentionally dox someone? These are critical questions to reflect upon.

In the future, there will undoubtedly be individuals who warrant public scrutiny and exposure. Social media will remain a platform for collective accountability.

For West Elm Caleb, his private life has now been thrust into the public eye, and there’s no turning back.

While the public square can serve as a valuable space, perhaps it’s time to be more deliberate about who we choose to scrutinize, how we do it, and the reasons behind it.