Mediaboss Marketing

Performer wears Vladimir Putin mask in Halloween performance at Moscows Doc theatre. Photograph: Alexey Zhiryako

Russia has been discouraging public celebrations of Halloween as part of a campaign against western influence.

But that did not stop Teatr.Doc from staging a bitingly satirical Night of the Living Dead on Friday night in what may be one of the last ever productions at the tiny basement theatre in central Moscow famous for innovative and uncompromising work.

In a move that has shaken the international theatrical community, the Moscow authorities have ordered Teatr.Doc to vacate the basement on grounds that it had violated property regulations.

Many people think the eviction order masks an illegal attempt to censor one of Moscows few independent theatres and turn the premises into something and more profitable and predictable like a cocktail bar or billiard hall.

Problems began at Teatr.Doc, or Doc as its known among Moscow theatre buffs, when fire inspectors visited in April and ordered the theatre to replace a window with a door. What initially looked like a safety precaution turned out to be bureaucratic trap. Moscow City Property Department has ruled the new exit breaches structural rules and has terminated Teatr.Docs lease.

Were not state-owned and dont receive any government funding so the lease is the only weapon the authorities can use against us, said Mr Ugarov who co-founded Teatr.Doc with his wife and fellow playwright and director Elena Gremina in 2002.

News of Teatr.Docs eviction has sparked outrage. More than 6,200 people including Elyse Dodgson, international director at Londons Royal Court Theatre, and Hollywood actor Bill Pullman have signed a petition on change.org urging Moscows mayor to reverse the decision.

Russia has reverted to Soviet style censorship and petty vindictiveness to silence Teatr.Doc, British playwright Tom Stoppard wrote in an open letter published last week. With sorrow one cannot help noting that the battle for freedom of expression which has been won in the past has to be fought again by this tiny theatre.

Founded in the early years of Vladimir Putins rule, Teatr.Doc has made enemies with documentary work that explores the social and political fall out from Russias slide towards authoritarianism.

Originally posted here:
Moscows fringe Doc theatre faces censorship with eviction

Lets Censor The Nightmare Before Christmas - Unnecessary Censorship on Halloween Week
Jack #39;s back just in time for Halloween Want something else censored? Comment below. I #39;m watching you ---------- SUBSCRIBE: http://bit.ly/14u7TOM TWITTER: https://twitter.com/brooksshow VLOGS:...

By: Brooks Show

Read the rest here:
Lets Censor The Nightmare Before Christmas - Unnecessary Censorship on Halloween Week - Video

We #39;re Not Pros 7: Censorship
Censorship is a tricky subject. I guess partly the whole offensiveness to downright hate crime side factors in, I #39;m just opposed to words being spelled or said that aren #39;t made of letters....

By: Giant Enemy Channel

Read the original here:
We're Not Pros 7: Censorship - Video

[472] Politicos BP Sugar Daddy, Capitalisms Successful Alternative Fukushima Censorship
Abby Martin Breaks the Set on Politico covering for BP, the need to rid the world of nuclear weapons and the continuing effects of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. LIKE Breaking the Set @ http://fb...

By: breakingtheset

See original here:
[472] Politicos BP Sugar Daddy, Capitalisms Successful Alternative & Fukushima Censorship - Video

By Anshuman A. Mondal

The prime minister was recently accused of tolerating racism by posing with some blacked-up Morris dancers for a publicity photograph. His accusers have, in turn, been accused of being over-sensitive or guilty of misreading.

It's a wearyingly familiar scene, played out every time there is a controversy of this kind. One side claims the right to freedom of speech, the other insists that other fundamental rights have been violated (for instance, to be free from racial discrimination). A stalemate ensues that is never resolved, but life moves onuntil the next controversy flares up.

The giving and taking of offence is at the heart of these controversies. But what exactly is going on when people give or take offence? Is it simply a difference of opinion or interpretation, or are there deeper motivations and explanations?

To answer these questions we need to re-think not just freedom of speech, but also the idea of 'speech' on which it rests.

The common sense view of language is that is simply a vehicle of communication. It sees expression as merely the passing of information, ideas, concepts and images from one human to another. 'Speech' is therefore separated from action. While making speech always involves an act writing, verbalisation the expression, once it is made, stands on its own, apart and distinct from the act which created it.

This underlies most contemporary understandings of freedom of speech. The first amendment of the US constitution, for instance, states that "Congress shall make no lawabridging the freedom of speech". If speech is not distinct from action, then this would effectively mean that Congress shall not make any law, which is absurd.

However, in his seminal book How to Do Things with Words, the Oxford philosopher J L Austin developed something known as 'speech act theory'. He argued that there were two broad categories of speech: the first, which he called 'constatives', are simply descriptive and informational; the second he called 'performatives', and they dont simply say something, they do something. These forms of speech are therefore a kind of action.

In my book Islam and Controversy: The Politics of Free Speech after Rushdie, I argue that the giving and taking of offence are performative speech acts in Austins sense. They act upon the world and the work they do is political insofar as they aim to establish a power relation between offender and offendee. Put simply, to offend someone is to subordinate them, to put them down. Conversely, to take offence is to draw attention to that subordination.

The link between abusive speech and the performance of power is demonstrated by a simple thought experiment how many offensive terms of abuse can you think of that apply to the white race, male gender or heterosexuality?

Visit link:
Comment: Don't fear censorship it protects the vulnerable