What is “cancel culture”? Jonathan Rauch sets out six characteristics in his well-considered article. Here is his intro:

So what, exactly, does a cancellation consist of? And how does it differ from the exercise of free speech and robust critical debate? At a conceptual level, the difference is clear. Criticism marshals evidence and arguments in a rational effort to persuade. Canceling, by contrast, seeks to organize and manipulate the social or media environment in order to isolate, deplatform or intimidate ideological opponents. It is about shaping the information battlefield, not seeking truth; and its intent—or at least its predictable outcome—is to coerce conformity and reduce the scope for forms of criticism that are not sanctioned by the prevailing consensus of some local majority.

Here are the six characteristics. He elaborates on each of these in his article:

• • Punitiveness
  • Deplatforming
  • Organization
  • Secondary Boycotts
  • Moral Grandstanding
  • Truthiness

Rauch mentions others who have explored this issue:

Obviously, mine is not the only approach. Other people, such as Emily Yoffe and Greg Lukianoff, have made their own attempts at characterizing the current climate of fear or defining cancel culture. Hopefully, many more suggestions and refinements will follow.