After the development of the internet, it became quite easy for people to access information through technology. As more users started using computers and the internet, the platform became a viable avenue for people to do business, express their opinion, and upload data for public access. This development has led to the development of some websites containing undesirable content; thus, the necessity for internet censorship.
Internet censorship entails the development of firewalls that hinder access to websites with undesirable content. Internet censorship may also entail prohibiting people from uploading selected information to the internet. Internet censorship is a common phenomenon in the current world, and it is inspired by governments, organizations, and community efforts to ensure that people do not have access to sensitive or explicit information.
Internet censorship may also be applied by individuals for self-regulation to evade some issues inspired by religion and culture. Many governments across the world have implemented internet censorship over the past decade to eliminate the access of specific web content by citizens.
While some people show their support for internet censorship, others have condemned it, claiming the denial of their rights to access the targeted information. There are different types of internet censorship, and they are categorized according to the technicality of the process. This paper looks into internet censorship with a close focus on technical censorship, which comprises of blocking and filtering.
Blocking
Internet blocking is one of the technical measures used by the government, organizations, and computer owners to restrict access to specific information. Restricted information is normally against the laws and values of society.
Internet blocking operated based on denying access to certain websites for specific internet protocols (IP). Websites of specific shared hosting servers are blocked by the government and organizations, and the citizens have no access to the websites hosted by the blocked servers (Bee Think IP Blocker: Block Unwanted IP addresses based on IP blocklist, 2014).
The blocking process entails the use of software that identifies the IP address of the clients trying to view the prohibited websites, and it blocks their access. Internet blocking may also be used to hinder some internet users from uploading data and information to specific websites. This process also uses IP addresses to identify users, and it only allows specific IP addresses to upload data and information. This approach is used by most companies on their websites to enhance security (Frew & Sessano, 2009).
Internet censorship through blocking is subject to over-blocking and under-blocking. Over-blocking occurs when the government or organizations block more websites than intended in their quest to limit access to some websites. Most internet blocking software does not have the option of selecting specific domain names for websites. They just block every domain name from the hosting server, and this may result in blocking some harmless sites.
It is also possible for some blocking software to block websites with explicit content (How to, 2014). This selective blocking leads to easy access to unwanted information, which should be blocked. Some countries have embraced over-blocking the internet as a measure to ensure the people have no access to obscene content.
Internet censorship through blocking is used in the United States to ensure children do not have access to websites with obscene content. This internet censorship is a provision of the Childrens Internet Protection Act (Childrens Internet Protection Act, 2014). The Act compels the authorities to ensure that internet surfing for children is limited to access to educational content exclusively. It is the obligation of the government to protect the innocence of the children through internet censorship.
Filtering
Filtering is also a technical method of internet censorship. The most common method of filtering is the uniform resource locator (URL) filtering process. The process entails scanning the URLs for specific words and blocking the ones containing specific words. This method is not secure for internet censorship because internet users can easily bypass it through a virtual private network (VPN) (Tyson & Crawford, 2014).
Packet filtering is also a common method of internet censorship, and it entails blocking TCP packets containing a given number of restricted words (PF, 2014). This approach is a realistic and practical internet censorship method because it avoids the restriction of harmless websites.
Filtering is a softer approach to internet blocking. Internet censorship through filtering is the best method of ensuring the public enjoys the freedom of access to information while restricting the nature of the content people can access. The internet is currently filled with explicit content, and it is the obligation of the government to protect people from it (Cho & Feldman, 2001).
Issues with blocking and filtering
While many people believe that blocking and filtering websites containing explicit and obscene content is appropriate, critics believe that internet censorship is inappropriate (Qazi, 2014). Critics of internet censorship claim that the process of blocking or filtering websites through hosting servers leads to the blockage and filtering of some helpful websites (Deibert, 2008). It is also apparent that the government may use internet censorship to gag certain news websites as the case is in China.
Internet censorship is a sensitive area that needs to be addressed through laws that do not offend the fundamental right of liberty and access to information (Wagner, 2010). In some nations, the government uses internet blocking and filtering as a method to hide information from the people.
Internet censorship can be used as a weapon to keep the truth hidden from people in a society. China actively censors the internet for civilians to block their access to different websites. Accessing selected websites is illegal in the country, and some people are even compelled to conduct self-censorship.
Conclusion
Internet censorship is implemented by the government, organizations, and respective internet users on their personal computers. The process of internet censorship can be conducted through a technical approach based on blocking and filtering. Internet blocking is an effective way of ensuring everyone in a selected society does not have access to websites with undesirable content. Filtering is a technical method of internet censorship, which is based on TCP packets.
The software used for filtering evaluates the contents of the URLs and decides whether to block the website or to provide access. There are many issues associated with internet censorship, mainly because it can be used to hide relevant information from people. For instance, the situation in China reveals that the government is concerned about the amount of political information available for the people. In such a case, the government uses internet censorship as a weapon to block the society from accessing helpful information.
References
Bee Think IP Blocker: Block Unwanted IP addresses based on IP blocklist. (2014). Web.
The fact is that censorship defeats its own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion ~Henry Steele Commager
Right from our childhood we are exposed to censorship though in varying degree and measure. Parents dictate what their children should or should not do stressing that it is for their childrens own good. Interestingly, although our parents would dictate what programs we were allowed to watch, that did not stop most of us from watching or listening to censored materials secretly.
Once we grew older, we realized that censorship still persisted especially when the government decided that some music or videos should be censored because their content was considered immoral. However, the big question we should be asking ourselves is who has the right to make the decision that some media stuff is offensive.
Is that not a disguised method of promoting an authoritarian regime by allowing an individual or a group of individuals to make that decision for the entire society The proponents of SOPA bill may argue that internet censorship yields positive results, but we should not forget that we have witnessed instances of society oppression in China where internet censorship laws overlook human rights of expression.
Proponents of the SOPA bill may propose that the end justifies the means because it seeks to protect copyrighted material from being pirated online; however, the fact that this end is only achievable through unjustifiable means indicates that censorship laws do not achieve the intended results. It is high time we started searching for other means of protecting copyrighted materials, because it is evident that denying all people their constitutional right is not a solution.
Obviously, artists are likely to benefit from internet censorship laws, but are these laws not likely to elevate individual rights over rights of every other individual in the society? SOPA bill portrays the American government as the big brother who is always looking after little brother just in case they put harmful objects in their mouth. However, the government (big brother) should realize that the society (little brother) has to be set free to make its own decisions, because censorship does not guarantee compliance.
History has shown that censorship bears negative results because it gives rise to an utopian society by making some individuals more equal than others. Hitlers regime is a clear evidence of what could go wrong when censorship laws are misused. Apparently, Hitler banned people from reading books, because he feared they would enlighten the society about his oppressive rule.
Censorship is a reality with certain individuals trying to compel the government to ban particular books from high school curriculum because they think that the information is not appropriate for our youths. Important to note is that any attempt to restrict free thought deteriorates the situation because human beings are naturally thrilled by an opportunity to break the law.
In conclusion, it is apparent that censorship is a severe infringement of individuals rights because people have different likes and dislikes. Whatever materials an individual may perceive as obscene maybe appealing to someone else; therefore, what happens if one is allowed to make censorship decisions?
Will we not be promoting individual rights over societal rights? The above implies that adults should be granted an absolute freedom to make own choices. Consequently, if we do not desire to witness a 21st century model of George Orwells utopian society, censorship laws should not be allowed to succeed.
The world requires freedom and liberty for everyone to feel comfortable and be accommodated in our society. The intellectual freedom is the right of each individual to access information freely, that is both receiving and dispatching, exclusive of restrictions or containment. Free expression of ideas can be termed as intellectual liberty. Democratic societies are mandated to deliver this freedom because is the foundation of social equality and consequently must comprise the right to posses and distribute feelings.
Censorship is the control of materials or supplies that contain information seen to portray or pose negative ideologies that eventually might generate fierce civic arguments to the society, state or even in international boundaries. Information materials censored mostly are films, books, videos; art works both postal and electronic mails. Moderation of materialistic information can be based on definite audiences depending on age limitations or other distinctiveness.
Organizations and human rights activists that advocate for public rights use the power of words to defend any society that might be exposed to certain immoralities. There are some democratic states that have in place clear regulations stating that; every one has a freedom to read, write, view and express. It is for this reason that librarians must forever be enthusiastic to edit provisions and related information and supplies to protect the public from unethical information. The word censorship comes from the Latin word censor. The profession of scrutiny was given to few individuals who were to spy on the rest of the residents behavior and ethics.
The art of censorship differs from one material to another. There are numerous things that we see, read, hear or even say in our daily lives; these go down to books, televisions, radios, or any form of electronic media including the Internet, that might have massive impact to our surroundings. Censorship is traced back from the ancient communities like antique Rome, Greece and China, where it is known that around the year 300AD, this was passed as a valid law for checking ethical conducts and opinions of the inhabitants.
One of the most remembered historical saga on censorship, was in the ancient Greece when Socrates was forced to take poison in the year 399BC for admittance of his involving the young in dishonesty and untraditional divinity.This ancient view of suppression, as a compassionate civic check in the most excellent concern of the public, is still in use by many nations in the world and it has along eternal impact on the Soviet Union.
For several reasons communists applied suppression to bargain for their demands, and this is said to have taken the greatest durable time ever recorded in the 20th century. The diverse complications of Censorship as containment, targeting matters seen to be filthy or indecent; unorthodox or sacrilegious; treasonable or profane is consequential to general public. The main aim for this art in our societies is to restrain and conceal beneath the disguise of defending the key fundamental public amenities that are; the State, families and churches.
For any government to get a good grasp of reign there must be mechanisms put in place to gather intelligence that keep the administration updated.One must admit that suppression and the philosophy behind it goes back to prehistoric period. Each culture had mores, norms and rules by which dialogue, clothing, spiritual execution, and sexual appearance were synchronized. As referred to Ancient Rome, where autonomy of idiom was reticent for those in power and that resulted in writers of subversive articles ruthlessly dealt with. Nero the emperor, is in records after setting ablaze books and even expelling many authors.
The emperor conveyed a strong message. As Michael et al (p.142) wrote, A lot of top secret information, which the newspapers and radios are not, allowed circulating. Clear evidence shows that the art of repression was inherited from the first autonomous state of Greece. Plato was the initial philosopher to devise a validation for academic, spiritual, and creative expurgation which projected unconventional ideas concerning God, henceforth is taken as criminal acts and proper trial recognized to contain profanation. It is on records that tales being narrated to children by their mothers could be censored. In our modern world, there are different types of censorships carried out simultaneously, and these are moral, Political, religious, military and corporate censorships.
Religious Censorship
The religious censorship actually suppresses the free views that might go against the teachings of the church. It is habitually performed on the foundation of blasphemy, and one known example is that of the author of satanic verses, who was condemned to die by the late Iranian head, Ayatollah.Religious censorship is regarded as the most reactive measure in both ancient and current suppressions. Influential denominations are seen to be enforcing limitations on the lesser ones, shunning their progress due to competition on autonomy. It is believed that expression of thoughts candidly was posing a great menace to some Christian church rulers.
Following the era of Protestantism and the innovation of printing press, both the Catholic and the Protestant church waged a great war on each other, prompting the Roman church to stiffen censorship on many books that were seen to be ideologically unsafe. In the year1559, Pope Paul IV outlawed some books he felt might raise arguments due to their contents. The interdiction of these publications was afterward carried further by many of other succeeding popes in later dates. Until now, there are some books containing teachings that must be censored before being allowed to a particular church or denomination.
Moral censorship
The moral censorship is based upon family interest. There are materials that must be censored before being released to public for childrens safety. Production of pornographic and violent film materials and Internet connection forces moral censorship to take stage. The US, as a known complimentary and independent civilization, where freedom of expression is tolerated, has underlying issues concerning censorship especially the Internet freedom, which has perpetuated a heated debate.
There is a public outcry demanding the monitoring of instructional and library media resources by subjecting all information supplies to sensible assortment criteria. Indeed, it is significant to supply affluent materials to scholars conveying positive information that is not distasteful or containing awful scenery. In this case, teachers are also accountable to widen their essential skills to examine and appraise assets found on the Internet and other electronic Medias.
It has been established that many children nowadays are increasingly accessing the internet and making friends, discussing social issues, meeting adults and their fellow kids. The Internet connection holds vast information that covers from education to sex related articles that are very uncomfortable for kids to access. Lockhart and William (1960) stipulate Complete responsibility should be ensured when documenting sex articles parents have urged for an urgent body to monitor and guard children from repulsive scenes of the Internet. The Internet access by kids is one of the disregarded areas that require very swift action from the authorities concerned.
This is the ground that moral censorship can gain its popularity among adults but might score very little on kids evaluation board. Even though it is unkind to deny our kids their rights to asses, at times when need be, restrictions must be carried out. Indeed this matter must be addressed tactfully, for the Internet can act as an educational library.
Censorship Political
The majority of influential personalities have been famous because of their ideas and convincing voices. Many have managed to use their strong power of words to convince the world. The German dictator Adolph Hitler was gifted with strong speech and convincing powers that he managed to gain the peoples confidence making them follow his directives faithfully. Power of words has made remarkable changes in societies that never knew democracy. And it is for this reason that many governments, have resided to political censorship to suppress those who seemed to be vocally talented. Restraining of views that are seen to be inciting the public is normal with many ruling governments. Obviously, the government of the day has every machinery at its disposal to dismantle any civil disobedience.
This is where political censorship comes in to repress the opposition. A state can use reporters to scuttle some grave propaganda among its people to deter the public from the truth of the matter. In the Soviet Union, there was no autonomous journalism that was allowed, until president Gorbachev ascended to power. The communists government was the sole regulatory body that monitored information to be conveyed by the media.
There was only one newspaper that monopolized the media space. However, overseas newspapers that were ultimately allowed supported the regime. Television and radio stations were always under the control of the communists. Foreign broadcasters who were never supportive to the government in any nature found there stations disabled at times. These acts of suppression faded away after the fall of the communists. China still has ideologies of communism and is said to be employing Internet observers of around 30,000 personnel just to monitor the electronic coverage. During the reign of Mussolini, press freedom almost came to an extinct.
There was great consistency put in place to fully check the media. The authorities frequently raided journalists and even closing down some of their premises. The Jews were never allowed to publish any paper and journalism to them was regarded as a nightmare. South Africa also suffered massively under the apartheid regime whereby law was introduced to veto any individual that was against the government. The authorities made sure that any person confirmed to be a government critic was closely censored and there was no way any newspaper could carry a story on such an individual. Saddam Hussein the former president of Iraq also directed the censorship of all press materials that he saw might be questionable.
Another Arabic country that is regarded as mainly oppressive concerning the freedom of expression is Syria. The human rights organizations have been seen in the front line to criticize the government on opinionated detentions and arrests. The foremost obstruction is the inability to afford the Internet services and the ultimate suppression from the government censorship bodies. In accumulation to maintaining rigid control of service providers, state imposes economic and technological constraints to the users of the Internet.
Military censorship
The history of military censorship dates back from the first and second world wars. The military intelligence was vital and crucial for any army to succeed in a battle. There were some secrets and strategies of war that were to be practical in keeping ahead of the opponent, and were applied especially when spying on the next move. The Indian troops of the year 1914 were some of the victims of the forces scrutiny in the famous Western Front.
There was consistent examination of mails by a band of censors that were instructed to compile seven-day information commenting on the contents of the letters. Several specific letters were collected and then translated. They were containing every all details of the sender.The majority of the troops were illiterate, and that meant in residing to others for writing of the letters. For that reason, they had a frantic time of identifying the corporation clerks who were to write the outgoing and to read the incoming mails. They later found out that the authority was censoring their mails and this prompted some of the soldiers who were educated to change writing tactics.
The censors who were intelligent managed to decipher most of the mails written in oblique idiom revealing of their horrors. The US Military censorship was uncommon in the early democracy due to the archaic lines of communications in the forces operational areas. Information received from the facade was never valued for more than a week. When the media fraternity became more complex in later centuries, there was need for scrutiny.
Telegraphic lines were federalized during the civil war era and this was due antagonism correspondence, that the authority wanted to suppress. The civic demand for current updates pivoted the tough contest for the reporters and this saw proficiency in professionalism.Indeed many uncensored news reported were mostly fake, but tolerance was deployed for the authority new, some traces of intelligence could be seen to influence civil opinion. The American war with the Spanish had several efforts of censorship thwarted after a vast logistical failure to conceal violence inflicted by the American troops. You have not transformed a man since you have silenced him. John Morley once wrote.
The American government also commanded transatlantic communications that included mails and the line cable. The information from the entire media fraternity, were subjected to strict censorship. When the World War II started, the US government in 1941 had a censor office that scrutinized all the out going and the in coming mails. Some of the in coming mails contained pictures of wounded soldiers and were never wanted to be seen publicly.
This seemed to worry the authority so much, that they had to step up censorship. Reporters had to concur and with strict regulations ended up performing self censorship to avoid victimization. The Vietnam conflict experienced comparatively pleasant bond flanked by the forces and the journalists. Inadequate in their ability to confine the flow of information, the administration had to grant the press practically unfettered admission to the combat zone. When the Americans invaded the gulf region, it was certainly, fair giving more space for coverage and less restrictions.
Corporate Censorships
The application of negative ideologies to corporate sector has greatly impacted on some victims of corporate suppression. Giving out threats to commercial acquaintances, denying admittance in market field and other commercial monopolies are seen to be traces of corporate censorship. Many articles have been denied circulation by corporate bodies in view of tarnishing the media fraternity fearing loses or impeachment.
Sports and film bodies have also suffered silently at the mercy of the corporate censorships. A survey carried out by an independent body found out that, reporters at state media outlets such as the New York Times, Washington Post, and the broadcast networks, mostly were from one party where attitudes were well left to the universal community on a selection of topics, counting on social issues such as abortion, positive action, and gay rights.
The interviewers recognized their prejudice when expressing some of the burning matters involving security of nuclear supremacy, to ethnic promotion, and the1970s power calamity.Their conclusion was that the writers reporting of divisive issues asserted their own opinions leaning to insensible procedures of concurring persons and analysis on their collective assumptions without acknowledging the reality on the ground.
In assurance, this doomed that information houses engaged principally on one party would fabricate equally slanted perception headed for the prejudiced bearing. Many countries of the world particularly African governments are out to gag the media especially those radio stations broadcasting in ethnic languages, which get threats of closure by their oppressors who believe they are perpetuating cultural hatred.Beaumarchais the French writer lamented, Seeing that as I dont put in writing about the government, religion, politics, and other institutions, I am free to publish everything.
Conclusion
In one intellect, the dispute for censorship equality is prevailing. Main concern is the menace of incompetent and unprofessional censorship still lurks with the increasing junction of media providers and modern technologies. Expectations are high that established broadcasters will strengthen their fight for the appropriate delivery of quality services to their customers even though, dictatorial anxiety is still being asserted to these classified operators.
Nonetheless, certain protections from the law are needed while chances are high that current situations shall be put to rest. General public attitude to recent days can be quantified as saying that in many countries across every diverse sections of expansion, it has never been that easy for immediate custodians of children that is; parents to keep an extra close eye on their kids. It is believed that most frequently censored materials are books, for the majority of them dwell on offensive mechanisms mainly politics, gender, sexuality religious values, cultural backgrounds, sacrilegious articles or rebellious and might not be appropriate for the children.
The educational facilities especially libraries are the most vital treasures in any society that value education. They are therefore charged with the full responsibility to both public more so to the children who are at no time required to access any material that might generate a negative attitude, towards their development and later service to the community at large. Censorship as many say could be the restriction of ideas and expressions, but to look at the issue summarily, there are specific questions that must be addressed and put back to their order of sequence. It is clear that no parent will allow any kid to pop in the library and come out with a book containing of violent scenes, sexuality, or with a book that actually endorses witch craft or ethnicity.
Everyone has a great task of ensuring that this general assignment provided by nature be accomplished in the best method applicable. Many hurdles are encountered because strong opposition is met during the removal of unwanted materials that are regarded as risky. Nevertheless, the real victims here are the public. American Library Bill, First Amendment is violated when the removal of books is carried out and actually brings controversial dispute, for people see it as a violation of the act.
The subject of restriction of books in schools is sensitively charged, but having known the consequences is always necessary to avoid confrontational issues. When one considers reading any luminous manuscript, shows that we think autonomy of idiom is precious, we must be able to distinguish and crusade about its most composite and vital limits. The culture of censorship must go on but it must be done both morally and professionally.
Censoring of educational books and other materials require time and money Librarians have great task of ensuring that only censored books and articles are passed to the public. It is a collective responsibility for the parents to also confer with the librarians to advice on materials best for the children. For the exposure of uncensored materials might be harmful to the society; and our kids in particular are the most targeted. Absolutely it is important for the libraries to have censored books and educational materials, because the benefits of censorship outweigh the disadvantages.
References
Aulich, James (2007). Posters of War: Mass Communication and Weapons, New York: Hudson &Thames.
Douglas B. (2000). United States Radio and the Political Culture, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Pp. xx, 362.
Lockhart, William B.; McClure, Robert C (1960 ).The obscenity of suppression: Developing Constitutional Standard. Minnesota Law Review, v45 n1 p5-121.
Michael S. Sweeney (2001). Secrets of Victory: The Censorship Office of and the American journalists and Radio in World War II. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, Pp. 274.
The censorship of works of art or media images is a timeless issue for two different groups of people: supporters who are affected by the restrictions, and those who are appealing to the freedom of expression. Looking at the problem through the arguments of Plato, Aristotle, and David Hume provides enlightenment for a revision of the notions of beauty, art, and censorship.
Plato speaks about the previously mentioned concepts in relation to God. The figure of the creator is an embodiment of good, or virtue, and the only reality, which represented in the Forms. Everything that has been made by its power is truth. On the other hand, the art designed by a human being is only a reflection of the creator and its work in the human world.
Therefore, man-made art is not a reality but an illusion. The concepts of deception and evil are contrary to that of virtue and, according to Plato, everything that distorts and corrupts reality should be restricted. The works of art that do not manifest grace but disfigure the significance of the matter and, thus, harm human beings should be censured.
It is helpful to follow Platos argument to justify the limitations on media images and artwork. The philosopher defines God and the creators responsibilities in the text of the Republic: The creator is real and the opposite of evil. A lot of people ascribe the formation of all things to God, however, it does just a few, and the making of all kinds of misery should not be attributed to the creator (Ross 12). According to Plato, a work of art is not a deed of God, but of a man.
The efforts of a human being cannot be comparable with the creators design considering excellence; the art only strives for perfection, and as far as the creation is virtuous, it represents Gods intention. Deliberate or not, the lack of integrity in art forms may lead to corruption, which is a sign of evil (Ross 8). As an illustration, the numerous images that objectify women as a sexual commodity and circulate in the media distort the perception of the female body and the role of women in society.
Another representation of cruelty is shown in Irreversible (2002), Gaspar Noes film, filled by the graphic scenes of violence and sexual abuse. The natural response to such depictions is disgust as a unique defense reaction manifested as nausea, turning away from the image or even physically distancing oneself from it (Kuplen 8). Should these pieces of human creation be restricted from availability to the general public? Applying Platos logic, they may negatively affect a viewer, especially a young one, deceive him, and distort his knowledge of reality and, thus, require limitation.
One of Platos foundations, the concept of ideal Forms that are a genuine representation of virtue and beauty and could only be reflected in works of art, is challenged by Aristotle. He assumes that these universal ideals are integral parts of an object because they change with the development of the matter. Moreover, the origin of the Forms as Gods creations does not explain their connection with the real substances, and in particular, those that have been produced by a man. Since the perception of beauty or virtue is linked to the understanding of the object, they are pieces of it (Ross 67).
Nevertheless, in his critique of Platos ideas, Aristotle considers art as modesty: Then beauty of style and harmony and grace and good rhythm depend on simplicity, I mean the true simplicity of a rightly and nobly ordered mind and character (Ross 31). Aristotles examination of poetry as an art form brings him to the conclusion that the ethical aspect of a literary piece is the primary concern of an author. Philosophers assumption that the character who reflects high ethical standards can demonstrate what is right or bad ( Ross 72) while the depraved personifications have potential destructive forces does not lead to the idea that the works of art should be censured even though they have negative protagonists or distort reality.
Beauty is an essential element in works of art for both philosophers. They refer to a word, kalon, which can be translated as grace, however, not literally. For Plato and Aristotle, beauty is entirely connected to moral virtue (Irwin 382). This raises the question: Is it necessary for only exquisite matters and characters with strong ethics to be present in artwork? The philosophers arguments reject the necessity of this notion. According to Plato, evil as the antagonism of beauty demonstrates the wrong approach, and can be overcome by itself through the search for truth. The philosopher writes that malicious entities are wicked by their essence (Ross 59). Moreover, they cannot destroy other bodies that do not contain the presence of corruption and, thus, a soul cannot be demolished by an alien evil (Ross 60). Therefore, Platos ideas leave space for a critical approach to censorship that should not be applied without the proper understanding of the nature of the offensive parts of the works of art or the whole pieces affected by unpleasant content.
The idea of taste in art as introduced by David Hume is helpful in the process of evaluating products of the media and artistic creations. Development of taste to perceive the aesthetic value in works highlights the notion of inner integrity, which is supposed to exist, according to Plato, inside of a human being, at least, for the reason that man was designed by God and like all of creation, an individual has excellence inside of him. This perfection assists a man in what may be, at times, a strenuous effort to separate the virtue from the evil.
At the same time, Hume claims that virtue is an ideal image created in the mind, and affects the perception of pieces of art from person to person. Accepting this assumption, it is possible to conclude that neither works of art nor media images should be censored or restricted in any way. The understanding of art depends only on individuals and their natural inclinations. If a man is moral by his nature, he will perceive the piece of art according to his intrinsic values. The same is of value for a man who is corrupted. His understanding of the same work of art will be different because his personality and experience allow him observing something that the man of virtue cannot comprehend. Therefore, the introduction of censorship will limit the scope of meanings that the images have.
In summary, applying Platos view on art, the regulation of media products and the aesthetic domain has to be limited by common sense. Every person perceives information according to diverse personal and social aspects. There will be a threat of an absence of various voices if any one position, even the virtuous one, is accepted as the truth.
Do you believe that the protection of freedom of speech and expression should always be critical for the USA or censorship is a good idea? After the implementation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, people received an opportunity to speak up their minds without any limits or prohibitions. However, the controversy regarding the benefits of such freedom and its drawbacks has existed for a long time already. People do not deny that some things should not be reached by everyone. Due to this idea, the television content rating systems exist. Still, they just recommend the viewers what to watch but do not implement real limitations. This issue becomes even more controversial when speaking about the Internet. The World Wide Web is full of information that does not usually face any selection procedure and reveals any content uploaded by the users including the one that is generally considered to be improper.
This paper focuses on technology and a topic of the Internet Censorship/Classified Information Leaks. The attention is mainly paid to the existing controversy regarding the necessity to implement the Internet censorship in the USA so that the work becomes more precise and consistent. This paper will try to answer the main question of whether the USA should adopt the Internet censorship or not. It will argue that that even though it violates the freedom of speech and expression, the US government should implement balanced Internet censorship because it prevents crimes, strengthens national security, and protects Americans.
Personally, I became interested in this topic a long time ago. At first, being a child, I just wondered why directors would make those films that I was not allowed to watch. As I grew older and started to use the Internet, my parents prohibitions took the backseat. Still, the main influence was made on me when I was abroad. Very often I was discouraged to continue surfing because of the improper information, such as partially distorted pornographic images, that I was not interested in but that would constantly appear on my screen. In the USA and many other countries, such things are rarely met that is why I got interested in the way different countries control the Internet. Today, I am able to ignore the information of this kind, but I also realize that the issue is not limited to the age-rating content.
Background on Internet Censorship
During the last several years the Internet turned into the most frequently used source of entertainment and information. According to NTIA, more than 2 million people resort to it each month so that about a half of all USA population can be found online on a regular basis (Kozlowsky, 2016). Already in the beginning of the 21st century, about 55% of Americans used the Internet, which reveals an increase of 26 million in a year and means that today this number is much bigger (Kozlowsky, 2016). The amount of information that can be found online grows extremely fast. This tendency is uncontrollable because there is almost no restriction regarding the content and the type of the information you can upload for other users to reach it. Thus, people can find almost everything, including hate speeches and pornography, in this way. In general, people all over the world are free to use the Internet as they want because they have a right to utilize it for different purposes. Still, not all of them believe that such privileges should be available for everyone.
From the very beginning, The Internet was just a simple communication tool. Still, with the course of time, it turned into a credible source of information. It links different people from all over the world and allows them to reach almost any information they want. Today, both individuals and businesses make use of this technology that never stops developing. However, with the development of the Internet advantages, its drawbacks affected the users more and more. A lot of hate-speeches, pornographic materials, and terrorists activities are maintained with the help of the World Wide Web. In order to take them under control, the government implements censorship.
It is both the legislative and moral process that prevents the users from reaching inappropriate information, materials, and actions. The justification for censorship is that it promotes the development of society. Nowadays, several bills concerning these issues have already passed in the USA, but not all Americans believe them to be necessary and appropriate. France, India, and China are among those countries that are known for the implementation of the Internet censorship. They emphasize the fact that such approach allows to ensure nations security. Their governments use different methods to reach this goal, including content filtering, surveillance, policies, and tapping. Using their example, the USA can also continue reaching advantages of the Internet censorship.
Moral Theories and Censorship
The issue of the Internet censorship can be considered from the point of view of different moral theories. In the majority of cases, it deals with the control of pornography that is thought to be not appropriate in modern society. However, Kant claimed that a loved person is sexually attractive. He separated sexual desires that are focused on the body and on a complete individual, underlying that the last ones should not be experienced outside marriage (Gray, Knobe, Sheskin, Bloom, & Barrett, 2011). In this way, he supported the adoption of the Internet censorship and implementation of related policies.
Similar ideas are discussed in the framework of utilitarianism. According to this moral theory, censorship can be rather advantageous because the government will have an opportunity to prevent the outspread of pornography and other information of different types with improper content. It followers underline that such subjects reduce the dignity of life, and harm those who are portrayed and those who watch as well as their families. It can ruin ones family, lead to a divorce, and even increase incidents of rape. In addition to that, when pornography is normally available online, people tend to get used to such content. As a result, their sympathy for victims reduces.
According to the social contract theory, peoples freedom of expression is underlined. Still, it does not emphasize conscience as a right to be independent of the state and has individual values. It is rather an ability to understand personal sovereignty. The USA is still expected to protect its citizens even though they are not obliged to follow and accept all common ideas. In fact, the country should even make sure that peoples conscience is not unwillingly affected by ones fellows (MacLean, 2016). Thus, the social contract theory also supports the idea of the Internet censorship implementation.
Experiences of Other Countries
A lot of countries all over the world practice censorship successfully. The development of the Internet provided a lot of opportunities to support economic development and democracy. It allowed the users to express their opinions in different forums. As a result, communication became more vertical, which means that peoples social levels and other discrepancies became less important. They tend to feel less affected by their position and are glad to have an opportunity to operate the same information as others. In this way, it also ensures trust and confidence, as a lot of personal information can be found on the Internet due to the fact that it is a source of social interaction.
Realizing that the World Wide Web can affect the lives of the general public adversely by harmful and inappropriate information as well as by disclosure of personal data, the governments of many countries considered the implementation of the Internet censorship is. In addition to the USA, France and India developed policies to take activities on the Internet under control. Still, the country that is widely known for its control over the information that the population can reach using the Internet is China. For instance, in China, the government considers that the Internet is full of threatening content that is why it is critical to ensure personal safety and protection. That is why a lot of different information is blocked. Still, in general, the representatives of the public do not consider such intervention to be a great limitation. Western countries basically try to protect their children from inappropriate content, but they became stricter after the terrorist attacks, especially those of September 11, 2001. While previously the population would be opposed to those policies that restricted the use of the Internet, now they realize that such intervention can save their lives and accept it (Ringmar, 2007).
As a result, the governments of different countries developed spying software that is used to monitor the information that is searched for and uploaded on the Internet. It even includes the investigation of email communication, which the majority of the general public considers to be totally confidential unless ones account is hacked. Of course, it should also be mentioned that the governments utilize the ability to control the information on the Internet in order to make its own activities more secretive. In this way, they make such data available only to privileged populations, which does not coincide with the freedom of information. However, it also means that terrorists and other enemies of the country are less likely to obtain some significant data that can make it more vulnerable.
The Western countries actively utilize technologies of control and surveillance and help developing countries to obtain such tools so that they can follow this example as well. The governments encourage utilization of deciphering, tracking and wiretapping equipment, etc. They claim that such approaches do not affect general information and are targeted mainly at the control of pornography, hate speech and terrorism, which is undoubtfully beneficial for countries population. Being aware of the Internet censorship and its peculiarities, the representatives of the general public tend to accept content filtering and manipulation of telecommunication markets (Zuchora-Walske, 2010).
Benefits and Drawbacks
In order to define whether the Internet censorship is advantageous for the USA, it is critical to focus on its benefits and drawbacks. First of all, it is significant to mention that censoring can help to protect children from becoming victims of sexual crimes. Many adults who are engaged in sex trafficking and pornography find children on the Internet as they pretend to be their peers. Controlling content, the government receives an opportunity to find and prevent such issues, saving childrens lives. Adults are not able to control their kids always. Even though they explain them the concepts of morality and tell how to act in particular situations, children yield to the ideas of other people easily. Even being aware of the fact that they are supposed to follow the recommendations of content rating systems, kids may ignore them. Thus, it would be better if the inappropriate content would just be unavailable.
In addition to that, it is critical to pay attention to the very essence of a free society. The implementation of the Internet censorship does not mean that people will not have freedom of speech and expression. Even if it is not absolute, the public still has an opportunity to share ideas, but the incidents of cyber-bullying and racism will be reduced. In the same way, illegal activities can be taken under control, which will make the country safer and more pleasant to live in. The control of the content tends to lead to the reduction of malicious messages and is likely to influence people positively. Such alterations can strengthen national security. Prevention of hacking and punishment for it are sure to improve protection of personal data. Both terrorists and citizens can affect the safety of the general public adversely, which proves the necessity of the Internet censorship. Identity thefts happen more and more often because the users tend to believe that the information they do not share openly is totally protected. Limiting the content that can be uploaded and accessed on the Internet, the governments ensure that the information that can make organizations and users vulnerable does not become available on the Internet.
Some supportive ideas regarding the Internet censorship are outlined in the article written by Keen (2012). The professional focused on the Western democratic countries because their perceptions tend to be the most contradictive. In fact, the authors position on this issue is rather clear, as he emphasizes the necessity to implement an effective regulation system applied to the Internet. The author believes that the propagation of the terrorist agenda can be minimalized in this way. Still, Keen (2012) cannot disagree that civil liberty organizations tend to oppose such intervention. He provides several examples that reveal previous experiences of legislators who tried to censor the Internet but failed. As a result, no policies that could prevent the expansion of social networks and control the Interned were developed. These outcomes prove that the representatives of the general public perception are not willing to be controlled when they enter a digital world even though the author is sure that such attitudes are mistakable.
However, some people would argue that the implementation of the Internet censorship removes the freedom of expression and prevents the representatives of the general public from reaching the truth. With reference to the First Amendment, some people argue that no prohibition regarding the content of the information that is accessible and can be uploaded should exist, otherwise their rights would be violated. In addition to that, having no opportunity to obtain real information, people can become ignorant and spread wrongful perceptions. In addition to that, the governments can hide important information, for example about international relations, from the population. Of course, abusive officials can conceal wrongful practices, including corruption, in this way. Censorship prevents any digital evidence of illegal activities from reaching the public. What is more, the leaders of the country can obtain an opportunity to provide people with the information they consider to be appropriate regardless of the real situation. As a result, their personal gains tend to increase while others tend to have problems.
The adoption of the Internet censorship is not free, which means that additional costs will be required to maintain it. Realizing that there is a necessity to get at least new equipment and manpower, the government may increase taxes so that needed money can be obtained. The general public is not likely to have positive views on such intervention. One more drawback of censoring is that it can affect businesses negatively, which will also harm countrys economy. Many organizations use the Internet to sell their products and services and to advertise them. Thus, being banned, they will lose their opportunity to develop, remain competitive, and reach a global market. What is more, instead of censorship people can have rating systems that guide them but not limit. Of course, such approach requires much self-autonomy, but it can be seen as a transitioning measure and the golden mean between the absence of censorship and total control.
Such ideas are supported by MacKinnon (2011) who claims that the USA should not follow Chinas example because it will abuse American law. The professional believes that the government should not forget those efforts that were taken to develop and protect the freedom of speech. She also underlines the fact that the Internet allows the representatives of the general public to participate in politics and influence leaders decisions. In addition to that, the author emphasizes the fact that without censorship people will have an opportunity to be aware of a real situation in the country and prevent abuse of power.
Conclusion
Taking everything mentioned into consideration, it can be concluded that the controversy on the Internet censorship is an issue that remains on the front burner for a long time because it has almost the same number of reasons to support it and to oppose. The population of the USA tends to have different views on it, which makes it even more difficult to find out what should be done. Still, when focusing on the best practices of other countries and theoretical backgrounds, it seems that the government should do its best to ensure the safety of the population even if it means content censorship. The thing is that the prohibitions should not cross the line of being protective. Absolute censorship does not seem to be a solution, and Americans are not likely to accept those rules that are practiced in China, for example. Still, they tend to understand the necessity to protect personal information and prevent children from reaching inappropriate information or becoming victims of criminals who hide in the World Wide Web. The government should do its best to find a balance between prohibitions and allowances. It can be reached when taking the discussed information as the basis for the future policies and make them aligned with the populations views.
References
Gray, K., Knobe, J., Sheskin, M., Bloom, P., & Barrett, L. (2011). More than a body: Mind perception and the nature of objectification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1-14.
Keen, R. (2012). Untangling the Web: Exploring Internet regulation schemes in Western democracies. San Diego International Law Journal, 13(2), 351382.
The role of the internet in modern society can be emphasized enough. Many countries have embraced this technology and used it to boost their economies and other aspects of life, including education. Most importantly, digital trends have been adopted by corporations and small and medium enterprises (SMEs), all of which have used the internet to create and exploit new commercial opportunities. Therefore, it can be argued that access to the internet is a basic right for all individuals. Modern societies are living in an age where they can freely exchange ideas and opinions. Such benefits can be observed in democratic societies that embrace the concept of freedom of expression.
The internet and related digital media have been known to shape public opinion regarding sensitive issues. The freedom of information has been achieved in some areas and curtailed in others. The success of the internet as a platform for free exchange depends on the amount of control and censorship done by the governments. Today, even the democratic governments have been accused of denying is citizens this basic right, which raises several controversies.
The purpose of this paper is to express the dangers of internet censorship laws. The thesis statement is that the internet censorship laws and tactics ranging from imprisonment and repressing journalism tend to harm the countries growth and development in East Africa. Evidence from multiple sources will be presented to support this position. Additionally, counter-arguments will also be presented to refute the thesis statement where the basic argument will be that countries should restrict such elements as search engines and social networking should be held accountable.
Evidence
The right to information is one of the best things that a person can have in the modern age. Today, the gap between the rich and the poor can be addressed by easing access to information. According to Faroohar, a new report by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) revealed that those countries making it difficult for their citizens to access the internet suffered great economic costs. The growth of modern economies depends on the availability and access to information (Calandrino). Therefore, it can be argued that censoring and restricting access to information only serves to derail the economic growth of a country. To support the thesis that censoring and repressing journalism harms the economy, several claims can be made and backed by evidence from multiple publications.
The first claim is that telecommunication is crucial for economic growth and that these two concepts are interrelated. Additionally, telecommunication tends to make such activities as trading more effective and efficient, which means that greater revenues can be generated. The reasoning and evidence supporting this claim have been presented by Steele, who explores the effects of a digital divide. Steele argues that accessing information from the internet allows people to engage in productive economic activities. Examples include online shopping, digital transactions, online auctions, and comparison of product prices.
Therefore, censoring means denying the public the chance to explore and engage in these activities, which limits their economic productivity. The concept of e-commerce has emerged as a result of the internet. The basic idea behind e-commerce is that businesses and customers can interact through digital media to conduct transactions. Such a business model requires that the consumers have adequate access to both the internet and information. Many experts have successfully established that modern economies are built with the information where data is regarded as a key asset. Therefore, telecommunication and other online media are the building blocks of e-commerce.
Censorships can also be costly processes, majorly because it means cutting incomes and revenues generated from the internet. Examples of such have been presented by Gaille, who establishes that internet shutdowns cost states an estimated $2.4 billion in the year 2015.
Another illustration is Egypt, where the decision to cut internet connectivity cost the country $90 million, which was to be paid by the taxpayers (Gaille). The governments of those nations that restrict the internet can be accused of causing financial losses to the taxpayers. Additionally, such governments may have failed to fully acknowledge the economic value of the internet despite the many successful e-commerce corporations illustrating just how much can be gained from connectivity. The bottom line is that the internet and telecommunications are vital platforms for economic growth and that censorships act as barriers to such growth potential.
Another claim is that no democracy can survive with censorship. According to Zuesse, only dictatorships can function with censorship because democracies depend on the ability to make their own decisions based on truth. The argument is that with censorship, people cannot make decisions based on truth but only the lies spread by the entities censoring and filtering the flow of information. The problem that emerges from such situations is the spread of fake news, which makes people less informed and misleads any decisions that people need to take. The challenge has become so profound that even the governments are trying to fight fake news through legislation (Henley).
The government may implement censorship as a program to combat fake news, which means that censorship is not the reason for the problem. However, the ability to restrict information accessed by people means that censorship is already in place, which means that the spread of fake news is a particularly sensitive subject.
The fact that democracies cannot survive censorship can be illustrated using the case of Eritrea. Mangolin has labeled Eritrea as the most censored country in the world. The country has only one government-controlled television channel and a single newspaper for a population of approximately six million people. The citizens are effectively denied the opportunity to speak freely, earn an education, work, or criticize the government.
People are forced into lifelong military services in conditions almost similar to slavery, and refugees see Eritrea as a country without opportunities. Dictatorship thrives best when the government successfully restricts all rights, including the right to hold the government accountable for its actions. However, the availability of the internet has given the activists some hope because messages of descent can be posted on Facebook and other social networking sites. Censoring the internet and repressing journalism are perfectly illustrated by Eritrea, which also shows that no democracy can thrive a censorship regime.
The third claim is that all tools that connect people and that allow information sharing can be restricted. For example, people can be blocked from accessing certain websites, as explained by Leiva-Gomez. Examples of countries that have been known to engage in such practices include North Korea, Turkey, Iran, China, and Yemen. Domestic censorship programs mean that government initiates the processes of blocking web pages. For instance, on 20 March 2014, Turkey enacted an active block of Twitter. Such activity means that a countrys government keenly monitors social media and other websites that can be used by people to express negative attitudes towards the government.
It can be argued that only governments with bad regimes can implement full blockage of internet access, which is majorly a strategy to restrict the international freedom of speech and expression. The American Civil Liberties Union has published an article expressing instances where the government has hindered the freedom of expression in the arts and entertainment industry. Legislations have become a vital tool for governments hoping to pursue the censorship agenda.
Another illustration of the fact that tools of information exchange are restricted is the email messaging application that has been disrupted and monitored by some countries. According to ProtonMail, online censorship has a basic objective of hiding certain truths and obfuscating information. The internet is the main tool targeted, which includes altering the search results in the search engines or shutting down the entire internet.
The internet today connects over 1.5 billion people across the globe (ProtonMail), which means that restricting its access effectively blocks many from accessing information. The main challenge is that even the large internet companies, including Facebook and Google, are engaged in censoring activities. Such firms are often acting for businesses that seek personal data to customize online advertisements. Google and Facebook seek to maximize advertising revenues, and businesses often require to have useful data to tailor messages. The issue of censorship becomes more complex when the tools for information sharing are monitored even by entities other than the government.
Refutations
Several opposing views can be presented to highlight areas where this practice may be acceptable. First, it can be argued that internet censorship reduces the amount of false data and fake news that are used to misinform people. According to Henley, fake news is cheaper and easier to produce as a result of the advancements in the internet. For politicians, such a phenomenon can present many opportunities, which only serve to make the problem even worse. Therefore, it can be accepted that those governments seeking to develop anti-fake news laws are doing so for the best interests of the country. Combating fake news can only be possible with effective censorship.
Governments can monitor and trace the source of information before approving it for public consumption. Many companies, individuals, and entities spreading fake news can also be held accountable in the process. Additionally, those web pages and other online sites containing such information can be blocked completely. Therefore, censorship can be used to address the challenge of fake news but only if it is ethically used.
Those supporting this position fail to acknowledge that the governments can use this pretense to implement censorship programs to deny people the right information. The case of Eritrea should serve as a warning because total censorship and repression of journalism have meant that even activists are unable to question the actions of the regime (Mangolin). Fake news can be addressed using strategies better than censorship programs, whose main evil is the denial of access to information. Additionally, censorship can mean that a government invades the privacy of people through accessing private messages. The issue of digital privacy is already a major concern, and censorship will only make it worse.
Another opposing view is that censoring the internet can facilitate the security of users. Such activities as data mining have been deployed by individuals and corporations in a process that leads to the use of personal information without the owners consent. The topic of privacy has already been highlighted in the refutation of the first opposing view, but the main concern here is that the use of personal data for commercial gains remains a possibility. The concept of targeted advertising, as explained by ProtonMail, requires the firm to have certain information regarding a person or a group of people. With such data, adverts can be tailored to meet the tastes of the users.
While such a process may seem harmless, the biggest worry is that personal data has been accessed without authorization. Governments can implement certain measures to prevent such activities by companies. However, such restrictions may not be possible without censorship and filters. Therefore, it can be argued that censorship can be used to enhance cybersecurity and to protect the information of the internet and digital media users.
Cybersecurity is a complex issue and should not be used as an excuse for allowing internet censorship. It can be argued that those individuals who are given the job of filtering and censoring personal data are also in charge of the same. In other words, censorship only limits who can be allowed to use a persons private data. Even the government cannot be trusted with the data because politicians are also keen to exploit these issues for personal gains. In a nutshell, these opposing views fail to acknowledge that the problems they purport to solve through censorship are more complex and sensitive and cannot be completely solved through censorship.
Conclusion
This paper has supported the position that internet censorship only harms the economies of countries. The arguments and supporting evidence presented establishes that the internet offers countries a platform for productive commercial activities. Many people and businesses can transact and generate revenues that can have a significant impact on a nations gross domestic products (GDP). E-commerce businesses employ people and create business opportunities for entrepreneurs.
Additionally, the internet makes it possible for people to access information, which is deemed to be a necessity for the survival of modern companies. In other words, information is a key asset, and denying people and businesses information tends to curtail their development. Besides economic implications, it is important to understand that democracy is also threatened by internet censorship. Democracy means people can access information and can know the truth, which they can use to make such critical decisions as voting. By limiting information, people become misinformed and make the wrong decisions that can have devastating effects.
Internet censorship remains a controversial subject because many people agree that such a practice is not good for the users. However, there are also worries unscrupulous individuals can have the freedom to use and misuse the digital platforms, and their activities can harm individuals. Censorship is one of the ways of dealing with such people, but the problem is when censorship becomes an excuse to deny people the right to information. Therefore, it is hard to reach a conclusive outcome when arguing for or against internet censorship, even when ethical practices are a key requirement.
As the restriction of speech and communication, censorship has always been an integral part of society. Usually, it is determined by the government, private institutions, or public foundations in order to control obscenity, child pornography, hate speech, as well as improve the level of national security. Currently, censorship is frequently compared with cancellation, as both terms are used in debates on free speech. In fact, individuals expressing oppressive or inappropriate opinions on social media platforms are likely to be canceled by society today. As a result, numerous people experience the fear of sharing their opinions on controversial topics in public. Moreover, social media platforms, such as Twitter, Instagram, or Facebook, have the opportunity to ban people in case their expressions are considered to affect society in a negative manner. Therefore, people live in a world surrounded by censorship due to cancellation.
Censorship has always been and will continue to be a part of society. This trend can be noticed in a variety of examples, including the case of Joanne Rowling. The author of the Harry Potter series has been accused of transphobia numerous times. For instance, Rowling was significantly criticized by thousands of people when she responded to an article discussing menstruation products in 2020. The author quoted the article that used the phrase people who menstruate referring to women (Madani). In turn, Twitter users got offended by this phrase, as they considered it as discrimination towards transgenders. For example, taking into account that some males who have not transitioned fully still menstruate, society perceived Rowlings expression as tremendously inappropriate. When it comes to the backlash that the woman received, multiple influencers and celebrities, including Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint, disagreed with Joanne.
The reason why her tweets were regarded by Twitter users as transphobic is that the woman did not admit other genders except for males and females. In fact, Rowling highlighted that erasing the concept of gender does not provide the opportunity to meaningfully discuss life (Madani). The debates between the author of the Harry Potter series and her opponents did not help to reduce the conflict. Subsequently, the writer became a part of the cancel culture that had considerable popularity on the social media platform at the moment. Rowlings response has surprised a vast number of Internet users, as she signed an open letter condemning an intolerant climate for free speech.
In other words, if a person expresses an opinion that is not supported by the majority of other individuals, this individual is most likely to become a subject of boycotting or shunning. On the one hand, supporters of this kind of censorship state that the cancel culture is beneficial for identifying problematic influencers and minimizing their impact on society from both online and offline perspectives. On the other hand, opponents of this movement describe cancellation as an urgent societal issue that eliminates the rights of others for free speech. Thus, the inability to find a balance in terms of censorship and cancel culture creates additional social issues for modern society.
At present time, censorship can be characterized as the activity intended to withhold or edit existing information. Furthermore, it is based on the idea to prevent information from being created. In spite of the fact that there are numerous reasons why information is censored, child protection plays the most important role in this case. As a result, multiple educational facilities across the U.S. struggle with keeping books in their libraries and classrooms. Parents and teachers aim to educate children without affecting their personal development with extremely mature information. Therefore, many books providing information about religion, politics, or sex are banned in school libraries. However, the long-term effects of censoring this kind of information among children and adolescents are frequently ignored. For instance, if children have limited knowledge in the context of sex education, they are more likely to face unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases at an early age.
At the same time, it is assumed that school censorship has resulted in the development of racial and cultural discrimination. Taking into consideration that children are not aware of the fact that African Americans were abused in the past several centuries, they do not have empathy towards this minority group today. Also, if a school student is restricted to education that only supports one religion, it is difficult to expect them to be tolerant to representatives of other religious groups.
In order to determine books that are most frequently banned from educational institutions in the U.S., the American Library Association released its list of the most banned publications of the year. In turn, the majority of challenged books of 2020 were based on racial injustice and the experiences of Black persons (Waller). In 1982, the court stated that books cannot be banned from the educational program simply because some people disagree with the ideas represented within these publications. It has helped reduce the impact of censorship on the quality of education, although a lot still needs to be done. For example, in 2019, out of all books dedicated to childrens education, only around twelve percent featured Black characters (Waller). Accordingly, school censorship plays a crucial role when it comes to inappropriate content, although excessive use of this activity is predicted to cause a variety of social issues.
While censorship of certain controversial works and texts is considered necessary, the method of censorship has historically been negative. Ray Bradburys internationally acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451 demonstrates the historical impact of book censorship on society. In fact, the novel begins by describing the society where reading books is banned. In turn, a firefighter named Guy Montag is required to burn houses where citizens read books. The local population is allowed to watch TV that promotes the importance and essential role of government. In this way, Bradbury aims to demonstrate the type of society that would develop in case books were fully banned. The process of book burning is the symbolism used to demonstrate the society that lives without their own freedom of thought.
At the same time, Bradbury does not consider book censorship as the main problem of present times. Even though this person was living in an era when digital technologies did not affect the life of society significantly, Bradbury predicted that digitalization would play a crucial role in the future. Bradbury highlighted that there is no need to burn books to destroy a culture, as this goal can be achieved by getting people to stop reading them. As a result, the twenty-first century can be described as the period of digital technologies. Presently, people have the opportunity to cure diseases, urbanize rural communities, improve the education system, and enhance military warfare with the help of innovations. On the one hand, technological advancement considerably simplifies life. On the other hand, the replacement of books by innovative technologies can result in poor ability to comprehend and to develop critical thinking skills.
Moreover, Bradbury demonstrates that he does not support censorship of books by changing the moral views of Guy Montag. Even though the main character of Fahrenheit 451 enjoys firing books at the beginning, his viewpoints considerably change after meeting Clarisse McClellan (Bradbury). Montag understood that he needed to put efforts into changing the way the local population is controlled, which is why this character started stealing and reading books. Consequently, he gained knowledge from reading books, thereby demonstrating the importance of being free to read literature and operate gained information.
Hence, despite the fact that censorship has always been an integral part of life, its impact has been changing with time. Usually, this activity is used to minimize inappropriate and offensive information presented in movies, books, posts, and speeches. Simultaneously, the impact of technologies is strongly associated with the process of censorship. In fact, Bradburys predictions regarding potential technology advancement can be considered true, as the process of book reading is currently replaced with the use of innovations. Taking into account that technologies develop rapidly, it is assumed that the process of book reading will be considerably minimized in the next five years. Nevertheless, in the context of censorship, people will get a vast amount of opportunities to share their thoughts and opinions. For example, the Internet is expected to become the main platform for expressing personal beliefs.
References
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine Books, 1996.
The Republic of Cuba is an island in the Caribbean, located between the Caribbean Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean (CIA, 2009). Among many facts about Cuba, such as the militaristic regime, communism, Fidel Castro, cigars, etc, with which Cuba can be associated, there are a prominent historical issue that puts the country in a negative leading position in the world. Such issue is censorship. In that regard, this paper analyzes the issue of censorship in Cuba, specifically addressing the era of electronic expression and the recent trends for change.
Taking the analysis from the Cuban Revolution and upward, it can be stated that many forms of censorship existed in Cuba prior to 1959 (Moore, 2006). However, after the revolution the form censorship taken a wider approach, a fact that government representatives in Cuba do not deny, stating that mass media in every country have administrators who decide what should and should not be included in programming (Moore, 2006). A particular context in the conflict between Cuba and the United States can be said to have an influence on the policy of censorship, where US initiatives to sabotage Castros regime resulted in the preoccupation with anything that threatens the moral and ideological force in Cuba. In the process of protecting national culture, the Cuban government excessively regulated the press, the publishing industry, and all other media as well access to national and international opinion. In that regard, the period most associated with crass censorship was the five-year gray stretch , from 1968 to 1973 (Moore, 2006).
As an effect of censorship, largely affecting artists during the period from 1988-1989, was the rise of self-censorship (Camnitzer, 2003). The communication with higher ranks in power, as well as bureaucracy resulted in such reaction. Self-censorship was operated on two levels: One is in regard to the tenor of the actual creative work being produced; the other is what is said in meetings (Camnitzer, 2003).
The first introduction to the internet was documented in 1996, and among the facts hindering faster connectivity development was the legislation forbidding US investment in Cuban telecommunication, and Cuban economic policies (Deibert, 2008). The effect of internet censorship can be seen through such facts as that by 2000 there were only 6,000 computers linked to the internet in Cuba, and approximately 80,000 Cubans had email accounts (Deibert, 2008). Despite the improvements in those numbers, the traffic was heavily regulated, and the high cost of usage is still an issue for development.
Assessing the improvements, the near total ban on internet was lifted in 2008, although the content might be still regulated for controversial and opposing material. In terms of literature, Cuba annually hosts what is arguably the second largest book fair in Latin America after Guadalajara , as well as supporting the best public library systems in the developing world (McDonald, 2008), an initiative the result of which can be seen in Cuba standing the third in literacy rate in the world according to UNESCO.
It can be concluded that the state of censorship in Cuba is still an issue although the times of the heaviest regulation were certainly in the past. Accordingly, the degree of the internet development can be seen related to the slow development at the period of the technology introduction in Cuba, and it can be assumed that the lift of the total ban is an indication of a step forward into reducing the content regulation as well.
References
Camnitzer, L. (2003). New art of Cuba (Rev. ed.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
CIA (2009). Cuba. The World Factbook Web.
Deibert, R. (2008). Access denied : the practice and policy of global Internet filtering. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
McDonald, P. (2008). ALAs Stand on Cubas Independent Libraries. Libr.org. Web.
Moore, R. (2006). Music and revolution : cultural change in socialist Cuba. Berkeley: University of California Press.
The issue of self-censorship is a relevant one because, in our rapidly changing world, the literature that is seen as fitting into the curricula often does not adequately reflect the processes and events that happened. This happens because of the self-censorship of teachers or whole institutions that believe adolescents need to be protected from the dark side of our world. However, as it was mentioned by NCTE (2009), the purpose of social justice as a process and activity is to explain to students that not all people are equal, that some have many privileges while others have none. Strict self-censorship might be useful if one is talking about extremely disturbing and gruesome texts; however, most of the texts marked as controversial can be recommended to students to show them that even fiction is often just a reflection of those problems that the real world faced or keeps facing.
However, when introducing students to controversial texts, one should keep in mind the importance of background knowledge that is often crucial to the understanding of a controversial book (Shanahan, Fisher, & Frey, 2012). As NCTE (2009) correctly points out, it is essential to teach about injustice and discrimination in all its forms (p. 1). A controversial book is a perfect teacher if it is introduced and explained correctly. Too often, good books are seen as unsuitable because of their content that focuses on disturbing and suppressed content. As an example, at least two books can be mentioned: Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut and the graphic novel Sandman by Neil Gaiman. Both were banned in the USA due to the so-called inappropriate content. However, although Slaughterhouse-Five does discuss violence and death, these discussions are related to the horrors of war and its utter pointlessness. As for Sandman , Gaiman was one of the first authors who was not afraid to introduce LGBTQ+ characters and discuss sex and masturbation on the pages of a graphic novel. Thus, those who belong to LGBTQ+ felt inclusive, and sex education, important for teenagers, was provided to them by a comic book.
The problem directly linked to self-censorship and boring literature classes is discussed by Gilmore (2011). The problem of the literature canon in schools is that it is obsolete, not quite relatable to the new generations, and dominated by white, male, European or American authors (Gilmore, 2011, p. 48). A great number of relevant issues such as sexism, racism, gender issues, elitism, discrimination, etc. is partially left out because most of the authors presented in canon focus on other problems. It would be unreasonable to say that these problems are less important; however, they are the roots of our self-censorship. It is hard for us to imagine that children can read other literature that is harsh, contains explicit language, or openly portrays difficulties experienced by any underprivileged group. The canon becomes the tool we use to censor books suitable for analysis and discussion, which eventually results in a very limited reading material for students.
It sometimes appears that such a limitation causes a limited view of the world; the world limited here implies that students cannot read the world with attention to details just as they cannot read books that the school is forcing them to read. The importance of reading the world is supported by Kirkland (2013), who explains how such an approach towards the world helps the reader comprehend what unfair conditions are reigning in it. Therefore, it is inadvisable to self-censor if you want to discuss a book that revolves around social justice issues. Some of the students (or the majority of them) might not even see these as issues at all because students perceive them as annoying details just as in the boring books from the school curricula.
However, self-censorship is necessary sometimes. It is useful to evaluate whether students are ready for a certain type of books. Some of them might be too complicated and challenging for students to grasp the meaning behind them fully (some adults have the same problem with such books). A clockwork orange by A. Burgess, Catch-22 by J. Heller, and Metamorphosis by F. Kafka can serve as examples. The structure, word choice, and themes in these books are challenging even for adults; that is why it would be unreasonable to analyze them with students because even with the best guidance these books require significant experience in reading to understand them. At best, students will regard such books as boring or too complicated. At worst, some of the ideas expressed in the book (the ultraviolence, for example) will be misunderstood. Thus, self-censorship can be helpful when you are certain that students are not yet ready for such a complex material; even if they are willing to try, it is probably more reasonable to explain why this book is a wrong choice (for now). Of course, students might try reading such books on their own; if this happens, the teacher can encourage them to discuss the book to evaluate whether or not it was misunderstood.
To conclude, self-censorship is often limiting and harmful, both for the teachers and for their students. However, some reading material needs to be censored by teachers if they are certain that students need more reading experience to understand it.
References
Gilmore, B. (2011). Worthy texts: Who decides? Educational Leadership, 68(6), 46-50.
Kirkland, D. E. (2013). Teaching the (uni) verse: An essay for teachers of languages, texts, and cultures. Voices from the Middle, 21(1), 41.
Recently, it has become more challenging for parents and the authorities to make sure that children do not get access to inappropriate materials that may affect their mental system or make them grow up too early. The situation becomes even more difficult because of freedom of speech and personal expression. Although some people find the latter to be superior, it is still of vital importance to put limits on material that is marketed to minors. While the threat of an expensive suit amount is a kind of censorship in the music industry, other means should also be implemented.
Why and How the Limits Should Be Placed
Many artists, including musicians, use their talent and opportunities to draw public attention to acute problems. For example, as noticed by Starr and Waterman (2017, 489), both Madonna and Prince have sought to blur the conventional boundaries of & sexuality and have periodically sought to rekindle their fans interest by & coming up with new and controversial songs and images. Often, musicians also try to attract the attention of children, but the childs psyche is still weak and underdeveloped. While they must grow up with the knowledge that they have many pressing issues to solve in the future, this information must be conveyed to them in ethical and discreet ways, not through provocation.
Madonnas hit song Like a Virgin is clearly written for adults, not minors. Her song and music video may raise numerous questions and are unlikely to share valuable ideas with children. It is probably appropriate to talk about premarital sex with sixteen-year-olds and older, but younger people should not be involved in such a discussion. In both her music videos, Madonna makes movements of a sexual nature, and the text also contains phrases that are not very decent content (Madonna 2009; Madonna Brasil 2017). In the more controversial 1990 version, her dress, movements, and other people on the scene should not be seen by minors to avoid misunderstandings and affected psyche. In Princes music video, the singer is partly naked and makes movements of a sexual nature (Prince 2017). While some parts of the text may seem ordinary, others refer to sexual intercourse. Some features of the video itself create a feeling that one should not even watch it as they are too personal.
Overall, while it is now more appropriate to talk about sex and offer sex education to minors, precisely psychologists, educators, and parents should set the limits. This should be achieved by studying the abilities of a childs brain in accordance with age, interests, and current public tendencies. The limits should be enforced by the authorities and also people involved in the distribution of products that are inappropriate for minors. It seems that the threat of a bankruptcy-inducing suit amount can de facto censor the music industry because performers do not want to lose their money. Finally, while people have the right to express themselves freely, this process is considered acceptable as long as it does not violate the rights and safety of others, in this case, children.
Conclusion
To draw a conclusion, one may say that the topic of censorship and the right to freedom of speech is a challenging and controversial discussion. However, when it concerns the mental health of minors, the choice should not be made in favor of freedom of expression. Children should not be negatively influenced just because musicians have freedom of speech, so some products should be censored and restricted.