Mediaboss Marketing

Censorship

Today I would like to talk about

censorship. Censorship is the removal of information from the public. Today censorship is a

phase of social control. It is becoming more and more common all over the world today. It

reaches as far as political power and public opinion. Often censorship is undertaken by

governments. Censorship is closely tied in as a concept with freedom of speech and other forms

of human expression. The censorship of opinion for the most part was restricted to the control

of speech rather than of printing. The censorship of free speech attempted to control the

audience. The purpose of this speech is to give information regarding censorship knowledge.

Censorship occurs when expressive materials, like books, magazines, films and videos, or works

of art, are removed or kept from the public. Censorship also occurs when materials are

restricted to particular audiences, based on their age or other characteristics. A few types of

censorship are political, religious, and the the censorship of music, but there are many more.

Political censorship occurs when the government conceals secrets from their citizens, while

religious censorship is when any material of a certain faith is removed. This often involves a

dominant religion forcing limitations on less dominant ones. Many musicians protested against

censorship in music and pushed for more freedom of expression. Considerable amounts of music

has been banned since the 1950's all the way to the present. One example is that

many states in the U.S. decided to make it illegal for selling N.W.A.'s Straight Outta Compton

album and the fines for catching anyone would go from $10,00 to $100,00 depending on how

many minors were involved.

When a society has freedom, citizens can collect and distribute any information they want

without any restraints. Another example is that in the Canadian Charter of Rights and

Freedoms, it clearly states that Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: the

freedom of thought, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of

communication." which means that this material in any form cannot be altered by the government

in any way. Also, citizens have the right to access information in all forms of media to be able to

watch, read or listen to whatever they want. The concept of freedom involves protecting the

rights of all individuals to pursue the types of information and to read anything that interests

them. The society has the right to voice opinions and try to persuade others to adopt their

opinions. Censorship believes that certain materials are too offensive, or present ideas that are

too hateful and destructive to society, that they simply must not be shown to the public. I think

everyone has a voice and an opinion and unfortunately, sometimes their voice is censored and

denied the right to express their opinion because it is different. I think censorship is wrong

because it denies an individual the chance to be heard simply because they have different ideas.

The only solution to the problem is to voice our opinion.

See the article here:
Against Censorship :: essays research papers

Censorship is when an authority (such as a government or religion) cuts out or suppresses communication.

This has been done widely. All countries, religions and societies have their limits as to what can be said, or written or communication by art or nowadays by computer.

Certain facts are changed or removed on purpose. This may be done because it is considered wrong, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or other authority. This can be done for different reasons.

A censor is a person whose job is to look at all types of media and remove material. There are many reasons to censor something, like protecting military secrets, stopping immoral or anti-religious works, or keeping political power. Censorship is almost always used as an insult, and there is much debate over what censorship is and when it is okay.

When there is freedom of speech and freedom of the press, most information can published. However, even in developed countries with much freedom of the press, there are some things that cannot be published. For example, journalists are usually not allowed to publish many secrets about the military, like where troops will be sent on a mission. Pornography is censored in some countries because it is seen as not moral. For these reasons, the government might arrest anyone who publishes it.

Most often things are censored for one or more of the following reasons:

There is much debate about when censorship should be allowed. For example, U.S. President Richard Nixon censored the New York Times when they tried to publish articles about the Pentagon Papers, a group of classified military documents that showed that Nixon and the military lied about the Vietnam War. The Supreme Court in New York Times Co v. United States overturned the censorship, saying that Nixon had not shown it would be dangerous to the military, just embarrassing. In other countries, journalists and bloggers (who are usually not seen as journalists) are sometimes arrested for saying bad things about the government. In Egypt, Kareem Amer was famously arrested for insulting Islam and calling the president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, a dictator. [2]

Governments are not the only ones who censor information. For example, when the history department at Middlebury College did not allow professors to accept Wikipedia as a source in papers, some said it was censorship.[3] This was because the department was telling professors (who usually have academic freedom) what works they should and should not accept. Sometimes, a group or a website will not allow some facts, articles, and pictures that they do not think should be seen. There is much debate over the difference between censorship and editing, that is, deciding what should or should not be published.

Go here to see the original:
Censorship - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music provides a powerful form of expression that at its most basic level helps to entertain while containing the power to cause revolutions -- both cultural and political. Musics inherent power scares some people who are afraid of the powerful potential to shape attitudes and beliefs. The banning of music sets a dangerous precedent for the censorship of other forms of expression -- with dangerous consequences for a free society.

Why is music censored? Factors may include clashing moral values, racial motivations, generational value gaps, and fear.

Music has historically been, and continues to be, censored in an attempt to enforce morality. Its not a coincidence that music censorship in America began to accelerate during the 1950s, when traditional and conservative values began to unravel. At the time, order, strict obedience to authority, and conservative values were part of the accepted mindset. With the advent of rock n roll, however, young America began to loosen attitudes on issues relating to morality. Technology also played an important part in shaping the moral power struggle in the 1950s. For example, the 1920s era saw similar complaints against flappers and jazz musicians; however, radio wasnt as dominant at that time. In the 1950s, radio provided access to new types of music that challenged traditional morality and created the dynamics for music censorship.

Moral authorities aim to determine what behavior is acceptable for individuals and for society. Drugs, violence, and especially sex are topics moral authorities attempt to regulate. The end of the 1950s witnessed many members of society, particularly young adults and teens begin expressing new attitudes about these topics: Sex and drugs were no longer hidden and secretive acts, but something to be exposed and celebrated. This shift in outlook began breaking down the traditional moral order in many aspects of society especially music.

Race may seem a strange factor in music censorship, but it has played a significant role. In particular, the 1950s and early 1960s saw a new genre of music -- rhythm and blues -- emerge onto the national music landscape. R&B music included freely expressed sexual desires, clear drug references, and other features that were not as prevalent in other forms of popular music. R&B was and still isdominated by black musicians and traditionally was enjoyed mainly by black audiences. When its audience expanded to include mainstream white youths and young adults, this was a problem for many older whites who considered R&B music as a threat that corrupted young people and promoted immoral behavior.

This phenomenon prompted moral authorities to take action. In 1955, for example, Houstons Juvenile Delinquency and Crime Commission banned more than 30 songs many by black artists. A Chicago radio station promised to censor any controversial music, especially R&B, after receiving letters from angry listeners. (Sparrow)

Racially motivated music censorship is not a practice limited to the past. More recent cases involve MTV refusing to air videos from many black artists in the infancy of the network. In 1983, during a live interview, David Bowie suddenly asked, Why are there practically no black artists on the network? (Why it Took MTV So Long) Michael Jacksons Billie Jean from the album Thriller, released in 1983, is credited with being the first black video aired on MTV in heavy rotation.

The argument can be made that racial motivations also played a large role in the FBIs 1989 letter to the rap group N.W.A. (Nuzum) The F.B.I.s intent was to notify the rap group that their song Fuck Tha Police wasnt appreciated by the government. N.W.A. supporters argue the group was only expressing the frustrations of inner-city blacks and holding a mirror to their everyday reality. While no legal action took place, the example helps give context to the pressures behind government and music censorship.

Generational value gaps are a large factor in music censorship. Older generations use their power to try to censor the music of younger generations because the new music doesnt reflect the values of the old. The R&B and rock n roll of the 1950s and early 1960s contrasted greatly with the values of the greatest generation, which grew up during the Great Depression, fought in World War II, and started the production that led to Americas global economic dominance. As a result, obedience, respect for authority, and order were important values for this generation. Conversely, the music being made during the mid-1950s and early 1960s reflected attitudes craving individuality, questioning authority, and exploring freedom, drugs, and sex. In fact, many times the music flaunted these things to societys elders.

For example, in 1965, the Rolling Stones and the Who were banned from radio stations nationwide because of sexual references in their songs. (Sparrow) In 1968, The Doors song Unknown Soldier was banned from many stations because of its anti-war theme. (Sparrow) In 1971, the FCC threatened to take away broadcast licenses from stations playing songs that glorified drugs. In the same year, songs by John Lennon and Jethro Tull were changed without their knowledge or consent. Lennons music was changed by radio station themselves while Jethro Tulls songs were changed by their record label Chrysalis Records. (Nuzum) Its interesting to consider whether entering a museum and painting over an artists paintings would be considered acceptable.

The generational value gap continued in the 1970s and 1980s, when heavy metal rock and rap music were particular targets of moral authorities. A Prince album caused controversy at a 1984 PTA meeting in Cincinnati, Ohio. (Sparrow) The incident helped spark the debate for government censorship of music. The National Coalition on Television, which monitored the level of violence in music videos, asked for the federal government to regulate rock music on television. (Nuzum) Although the request ultimately wasnt acted upon, the demand demonstrates the push from some segments of the population, mostly conservative, for federal governmental action.

The following year, the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC), pushed the music industry and the government to create a rating systems evaluating the content of artists. The PMRC also hoped for radio stations to become conscious about airing controversial content which would in turn censor artists hoping to become played on the radio. The PMRC was led by Tipper Gore and very influential wives of politicians and businessmen living in Washington, D.C. As a result of testimony before the U.S. Senate, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) began labeling albums that may be objectionable, including the infamous black-and-white label Parental Advisory: Explicit Content, created in1990 and still in use today.

Generational value gaps continue to influence music and music censorship. Today the focus is largely on gangster rap and sexually explicit hip-hop lyrics. In each case, the music being censored is typically regarded as the music of youth and features values different from those of previous generations.

At the root of all of the factors that lead to music censorship is fear. There is a fear by the authorities pushing for censorship that the music will affect young people negatively and prevent them from achieving a morally acceptable life. Many believe that without censorship, society itself will be changed significantly, and not for the better. Because the unknown creates uncertainty, fear of change remains common among those who attempt censorship, even when music merely reflects, rather than causes, changes in society. For example, country icon Loretta Lynns 1975 song The Pill was censored at many radio stations more than a decade after oral contraceptives became popular. (Sparrow)

From the Vietnam War to todays Iraq War, and from the advent of the sexual revolution to todays culture wars, music is recognized as a potential source of power to change values, ideas, and beliefs as well as to influence actions. Those who fear this change try to stop it by censorship, even when, as history has shown us, censorship is futile when change is inevitable.

-- R. Andre Hall, Journalism '09

Lombardi, Victor. "Music and Censorship." Noise Between Stations. 1 Dec. 1991. 22 Sep. 2009 http://www.noisebetweenstations.com/personal/essays/music_censorship.html.

Nuzum, Eric. "A Brief History of Banned Music in the United States by Eric Nuzum." Parental Advisory Music Censorship in America. 22 Sep. 1986 http://www.ericnuzum.com/banned/.

Sparrow, Kelly. "Music censorship (part 1) : A brief history." Examiner: Inside Source For Everything Local. 22 Sep. 2009 http://www.examiner.com/x-16046-Lexington-Live-Music-Examiner~y2009m8d26-Music-censorship-part-1--A-brief-history.

"Why It Took MTV So Long To Play Black Music Videos ." Find Articles at BNET. 9 Oct. 2006. 22 Sep. 2009 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_14_110/ai_n16807343/.

Continue reading here:
Music Censorship - Lehigh University

By: Chad Hawthorne CS3604, Spring 1997

The definition of censorship from the American Library Association is, "The change in the access status of material, made by a governing authority or its representatives. Such changes include: exclusion, restriction, removal, or age/grade level changes." [3]

A debate on censorship could cover volumes of law books. There are hundreds of modern day cases on the subject, many of which have reached the Supreme Court. This page is not an attempt to delve into every aspect of censorship, a task that the author finds daunting. This resource explores American's beliefs on censorship, some examples of censorship in academia, and how the issue of censorship relates to digital media, including the Internet.

Censorship takes many forms in our country. From the outright banning of books and information, to the more subtle censorship of persuasion. Despite the importance our country places on freedom of thought and the freedom of speech, there have been countless efforts throughout our history to curb those freedoms. Frequently these efforts are successful, either in the outright banning of information or a curb in the freedoms once allowed. According to UPI the censorship of textbooks, novels, and classroom materials was at its highest level in 10 years in 1992.[2] An organization dedicated to protecting constitutional liberties, People for the American Way, reports that "'censors' were more active in 1991-92 than in any other year, with 376 'attacks on the freedom to learn in 44 states." [2] Not only are these 'censors' more active but their efforts are more successful than at any point in the four years previous to 1992. According to the People for the American Way, "Forty-one percent of the materials challenged were removed or restricted in some fashion."[2] Censorship is not limited to books and physical media, it also has effects on the Internet and the digital world. Censoring material on the Internet has become an important issue for countries around the world. Censorship is an ongoing issue and the battle to stop censorship is one that has roots in the very beginnings of our country.

To understand Americans beliefs on censorship it is valuable to learn exactly where these values originate and to learn how they are being challenged. Our beliefs in freedom of speech and our values that limit censorship are exemplified in our constitution and the associated bill of rights. The framers of the constitution drew their values and concepts of civil liberties from many sources, including the ancient Greeks and contemporary English philosophers. From the ancient Greeks came forth the idea of 'natural law' and the concept of equality. [5]

Another more contemporary influence was the writings of the 17th century English political philosopher, John Locke. One of Locke's major contributions was the idea, "[T]he end of law is not to abolish or restrain but to preserve and enlarge freedom."[5] This idea translated into our bill of rights, ratified December 15, 1791. The first item in the bill of rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. "[5] This first amendment to the constitution serves as the basis for our freedoms of speech and the cornerstone of censorship debates in the United States. Many efforts to censor ideas, books, and electronic media have been challenged based on this amendment to the constitution.

One of these challenges to the law came in a 1982 Supreme Court case, Island Tree School District v. Pico. This case answered the question of who has the right to remove books from a school library and on what basis. The Island Tree Village school board removed from the school library ten books that it considered, "anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and just plain filthy."[4] Some of the books banned included classics such as, Kurt Vonegut's Slaughterhouse Five, Richard Wright's Black Boy, and Eldridge Cleaver's Soul on Ice. The Supreme Court admitted that the school board has discretion to create and maintain a school curricclum and to further appropriate civic and moral values. However, the Supreme Court announced important limits on this discretion; it said that the First Amendment extends to "the right to receive ideas" in the context of a school library, where "a student can literally explore the unknown."[4] The court stated that school officials may not engage in the "narrowly partisan suppression of ideas" by removing books from the library simply because they contain ideas that they disagree with.[4] This case was the basis from which all other school censorship cases would be evaluated. Six years after this historic case there came another case, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier.[4] This case brought up the question of weather the school administration has the right to censor and limit the content of a school newspaper. It was decided that the school administration does have the right to review and edit the content of a school newspaper. The court qualified their decision by stating that administrators decisions must be based on, "legitimate pedagogical concerns."[4]

The fine line between "legitimate pedagogical concerns" and "narrowly partisan suppression" is constantly being redefined and challenged by new censorship cases. These cases involve old forms of media and information, as well as new digital media. Censorship is not promoted by just one political group or social advocacy organization, however, according to the ACLU, "the greatest threat today comes from the fundamentalist right, with its ideological hostility to other religious or philosophical systems, to homosexuality, to sex education, and indeed the basic idea of secular education."[4] The censorship debate in academia is frequently a debate about children. It concerns what is appropriate for children to read, learn, and see. It involves censoring teachers and school administrators all in the name of the children. This debate about what children should learn is the basis for censoring the Internet here in the United States. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 censored most forms of digital media on the basis that children were getting obscene material over the Internet.[1]

In the United States censorship of the Internet reared its head in 1996 with the Telecommunications Act. In the Telecommunications Act there is embedded in Title V a measure called the "Communications Decency Act" or CDA. The CDA limits "obscene, indecent and offensive material" on the Internet.[1] This act makes it illegal to distribute pornography or other indecent material to minors over the Internet or any other digital media. It is a bold step in censoring the cyber-world, and limiting free speech. There was a tremendous debate about weather this law was needed and what effect it would have on the Internet community. Previously there were few laws governing the Internet and it was generally considered as bastion of global freedoms. However, this new law signified an effort by the government to censor peoples thoughts and ideas, under the guise of protecting children.

Other countries are also trying to grapple with the problem of indecent material on the Internet.[6] All of these actions have the effect of limiting personal freedoms and censoring the general public. Although other governments have different values and ideas about freedom of speech, their values and decisions affect everybody in this increasingly global environment, including us in the United States. The Internet has given citizens of every country the ability to communicate and transfer information across borders. This presents a problem in the area of censorship. If one country passes a law governing the use of the Internet, how is it to be enforced in this global environment? For example , "A German court has already acted to prevent users in that country from accessing sexually explicit Internet discussion groups. The court forced CompuServe, a US-based online information service, to block access to about 200 of the thousands of "Usenet" groups to be found on the Internet."[6] Clearly the laws and regulations made by one country have an effect on the Internet community at large, regardless of where a user lives. The ethics and censorship beliefs that Americans hold so valuable can conceivably be challenged and thwarted by the laws of another country.

In conclusion, the censorship one country takes to limit personal freedoms can have a ripple effect through governments around the world. This censorship often stems from the need to protect children from obscenity and "adult" topics. The need to protect children is most obvious in the nations schools, where censorship is frequently carried out, and even upheld by the courts. Now, with the development of digital media, children are learning about the world from the privacy of their homes. Must this digital media be censored and freedoms curtailed to protect children? Hopefully a solution will be found that protects children and freedoms.

See the article here:
What is censorship? - Undergraduate Courses

Internet Censorship Debate

Censorship refers to any action taken by a society to control access to ideas and information. Throughout history, many different types of societies, including democracies, have used censorship in various ways. The issue is increasingly important due to the rapid development of new communication technology. As innovators continue to create new ways for people to share information, many people are now arguing over the issue of censorship.

For the proponents of censorship, restricting the access of information is something that can provide benefits to society. By censoring pornography on the internet, children are less likely to encounter it. By censoring certain types of images and videos, society can prevent offensive or vulgar material from offending those that it targets. For example, some would argue that society should censor material that is insulting to a particular religion in order to maintain societal harmony. In this way, censorship is viewed as a way to protect society as a whole or certain segments of society from material that is seen as offensive or damaging.

Some argue that censorship is necessary to preserve national security. Without using any kind of censorship, they argue that it is impossible to maintain the secrecy of information necessary for protecting the nation. For this purpose, censorship protects a state's military or security secrets from its enemies who can use that information against the state.

Those who are against censorship argue that the practice limits the freedoms of speech, the press and expression and that these limitations are ultimately a detriment to society. By preventing free access to information, it is argued that society is fostering ignorance in its citizens. Through this ignorance, citizens are more easily controlled by special interest groups, and groups that are able to take power are able to use censorship to maintain themselves. Additionally, they argue that censorship limits a society's ability to advance in its understanding of the world.

Another main issue for those who are against censorship is a history of censorship abuse. Those who argue against censorship can point to a number of examples of dictators who used censorship to create flattering yet untrue images of themselves for the purpose of maintaining control over a society. They argue that people should control the government instead of the government controlling its people.

See the original post here:
Internet Censorship Debate | Debate.org