Balance of Media Censorship and Press Freedom

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Media Censorship
Conclusion
References

Abstract

This paper looks at the definition of censorship and the way government and corporations are using it. The government does censorship through enacting laws while corporate ownership uses copyright law. It can be concluded that government infringes more on press freedom.

Media Censorship

Censorship can be defined as the suppression of information, ideas, or artistic expression by anyone such as government officials or private individuals. It can occur at any time such as before utterance or before its circulation. Government censorship means the prevention of the circulation of information already produced by the official government (NCAC, 2008)

There are justifications for the suppression of communication such as fear that it will harm individuals in the society like the case of obscene material to the audience which can corrupt the moral values of young persons. Governments avoid the circulation of information on national security fearing that such information may help the enemy. In the Judicial system publication of pretrial information about a crime may curtail its fair trial. The publicity of personal information by the police or the press may affect personal privacy hence the fear of such consequences is what results in censorship (NCAC, 2008).

Censorship has been practiced for a long time among organized cultures, autocratic and democratic societies as well as in the freest of nations. The governments have always tried to regulate any new information circulated. The US government through the First Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits the expression of information in all forms of media (Qazi,1996).

However, there are some cases where the constitution has not protected citizens e.g. libel where defamatory falsehoods about public officials are not protected by the amendment and that can only be punished if the offended official proves that the published information is false. Secondly, fighting words, commercial speech, and obscene material (Qazi, 1996).

There have been cases where government censorship has violated the constitutional rights of its citizens. For example, Eugene Debs a socialist pioneer in the United States of the early 1900s was imprisoned for publicly expressing his anti-war position during World War I. The laws are also contradicting the freedom of speech e.g. in libel and slander (Qazi, 1996).

Communications Decency Act was enacted by Congress on February 1, 1996, which prohibits the access of pornographic material through the use of various media channels. Although the first versions of the Act only included access to minors, the revised version is inclusive.

Due to the concern of parents to their children concerning explicitly immoral material. Suggestions have been made on alternative censorship. These include censorship based on voluntary ratings, filtering based on origin, filtering based on keywords and key phrases, subscription to an approved service, prosecution of child pornographers, guidance, and discussion (Qazi, 1996).

Government censorship was recently witnessed in Canada where there was an outcry of the proposed tax credit system for filmmakers which empowers the Canadian government to deny certain projects tax credits if they feel the project is overly offensive.

On the other hand, we look at corporate ownership concerning media. Corporate ownership is where firms are owned by many shareholders. In media firms, there is evidence of corporate ownership although some are owned by families. In the media industry, copyright laws have been argued as a way of censorship such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The enforcement of copyright law inhibits artists from developing their artistic work from the past artists (DeMasi, 2008)

DeMasi (2008) states that the copyright law and restrictions on the fair use doctrine used to control information suppress free speech and stifle the creativity of artists by corporations.

This is because the copyright law does not allow the current artists to build on past artists’ ideas. Hence the there would be no evolution of the media industry just like the film industry use all media components. The filmmakers are of opinion that the copyright law doesn’t protect artists as it does to the protection of corporations e.g. Public Enemy group is being sued by a music publishing firm for using parts of George Clinton’s song.

Corporate ownership does make a distinction between piracy and using portions of a past artist’s work conflicting. This is because the film and sound clips are used to illustrate certain specific concepts but the ownership of images, language, and sounds is what makes corporate ownership infringe on the artist’s rights because they did not seek permission when using those images, sounds, and language (DeMasi, 2008).

Conclusion

In summary, media is the source of information to society. The information being disseminated is what is causing the government and corporate ownership to infringe on media. Although there is a need for censorship of media depending on the values to which society upholds, in my opinion, both the government and corporate infringe on media. However, the government plays a higher in infringement than corporate.

References

DeMasi, S. (2008). Infringement. Media review. Web.

NCAC. (2008). Censorship in Academic American Encyclopedia. Web.

Qazi, U. (1996).Censorship Controversy. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Balance of Media Censorship and Press Freedom

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)