Opinion: Johnny Depp x Amber Heard and the age of ultra-media judgments

Even those who are not closely following the Johnny Depp x Amber Heard case have certainly seen something about the trial on social media timelines. The actor’s lawsuit against the actress for defamation is in its final stages and has once again put the media spotlight on the ex-couple, whose history is quite tumultuous.

This time, what is at stake is an accusation by Depp for defamation due to an article published by Amber in The Washington Post in 2018. In the text, despite not mentioning him by name, the artist talks about her experience as a survivor of domestic violence and how the film industry and society as a whole view victims.

The repercussion of the publication was resounding, causing the actor to lose important roles in the cinema and, consequently, millions of dollars, which has been harming his career and his image since then.

Those who look from afar, and even with a certain contempt, at conflicts between celebrities may think that this is yet another legal dispute in which the boundaries between public and private were crossed to feed an audience thirsty for information about the lives of others that in no way impact their own lives.

But this case is quite emblematic of the hyper-connected times we live in, where everyone has an opinion — and a narrative — about everything that happens, from vaccines to gossip, even if it influences the behavior of others or destroys the reputations of the anonymous or famous.

If before we followed these scandals through print magazines, evening television shows and, later, through specialized blogs, today everything is instantaneous and we not only read and listen, but we react to it all by commenting, sharing, engaging and creating content.

We inflate narratives and help build and tear down reputations, which doesn’t always go hand in hand. The public plays an increasingly active role in this type of situation, making public opinion subject to TikTok tweets, reels and trends.

A quick Google search or the most talked about topics on any social network is enough to see the effects of this. Even in the press, there is a vast amount of stories that show how journalists themselves are covering the trial through its repercussion on the internet. Headlines such as “Johnny Depp goes viral by imitating Jack Sparrow going to court”, “Johnny Depp goes viral when drawing during hearing” or even “Judge in the case Johnny Depp x Amber Heard goes viral with exhausting face” are examples of this.

There is no shortage of memes, montages and even profiles “shipping” (a term used to root for the romantic involvement of two people) the actor and his lawyer Camille Vasquez. There is also no shortage of lists of celebrities who support Depp or Heard, as well as the hashtags #JusticeForJohnnyDeep and #JusticeForAmberHeard, which divide fans on social media as if they were in a football championship final.

In this infinite (and shallow) production of content on the subject, it is impossible to ignore that important and delicate issues such as violence and sexual abuse are emptied, gaining political contours that can perennially manipulate public perception of them. An example was the complaint by Vice magazine that the conservative website The Daily Wire would be promoting a campaign against Amber Heard on digital platforms.

Whatever the verdict, there is much to reflect on the effect of social networks and this new universe of information on cases like this. On much smaller scales, similar situations happen almost every day on the internet, with people canceling, little or no informed opinions about episodes of violence and the spread of hate speech. And whether we like it or not, we end up playing an active role in this when we produce, consume and engage content on these topics.