Censorship

From SI410
Revision as of 04:35, 19 December 2011 by Thomarol (Talk | contribs) (Copyright Protection =)

Jump to: navigation, search

(back to index)

Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to a particular organization as determined by a censor. A censor is any autonomous entity tasked with redacting said communicative material. In the present day United States, several issues of ethics surrounding censorship have been raised, which includes the censorship of pornography. [1]
What is censorship?


Types of censorship

Censorship takes place in the following forms both digitally and in print:

  • Text: This refers to the censorship of material found in the written media such as newspapers, magazines, published articles and books.
  • Visual Media: This refers to content that involves motion art or photographs. Examples are comics, television shows, and movies.

Censorship can take place in two different ways: replacement or removal of content.

Replacement

This type of censorship occurs when a part of a work is edited to replace the controversial expression. For instance, profanity on television is replaced with an alternative audio clip or silence. On other occasions foul language is replaced by a beeping noise and scenes involving nudity are often blurred.

Removal

This type of censorship occurs when the work in question is completely removed from public access. In the context of text censorship, this may involve banning a book in a country. In the visual media, a scene of a movie may be censored in the televised version.

Why censor?

"The primary motivation for censorship is often disapproval of the content or worry about its effects on "public morality". [2] There are several reasons to introduce censorship.

Reasons for censorship

Politics

Should governments use censorship?
Political censorship can be used for a variety of purposes. Often governments use censorship for the interest of the security of their nations. Sometimes it is used to safeguard military intelligence and other security aspects of a country. On the contrary, censorship is sometimes misused to conceal useful information and to turn around a political situation. Political leaders can exercise their power to restrict information that speaks against their respective governments. In many eastern countries, politicians have misused their power to enforce media censorship and conceal the problems created by their respective governments.

Religion

It is our right to speak freely, but occasionally it is important to draw a boundary while dealing with sensitive issues like religion. In cases where release of inaccurate information has the potential to cause disruptive results, it may be ideal to withhold such information. If censorship aids to protect and respect religious beliefs, then it may be the right option to choose. However, religion has often been inaccurately used as a tool to speak against censorship. Such an instance should never be allowed because it severely hampers the growth of a community.

Social

Morally questionable content is often censored to protect the interests of families and children. Such content may include obscene language, material that shows violence, or sexual content. However, there are often ratings and other markers that can indicate to the viewer that such content is considered objectionable or distasteful. For example, movies in the United States (US) often have rankings of one or two letters that indicate what kinds of content one can expect to see in a particular movie. These ratings are given out by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). In the US, there are similar ratings given to Television shows, which are a part of the [Television Parental Guidelines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_content_rating_systems#United_States] system.

Other times, censorship is used to protect the morals, values, and traditions of a particular culture or way of life. People sometimes argue that the media is responsible for introducing new cultures and ideas to the masses. This can be seen as a threat to customs of the local people in the community. While some people agree with this statement, others rely on the media to learn and better understand the values and traditions of other cultures.

Copyright Protection

The current copyright model in the US protects the publishers and distributors of media by attempting to sanction/censor any transaction other than direct purchase that spreads copies of media. Considering a consumer's perspective in assessing value of media, it stand to reason that less restrictions of copy distribution would increase the maximum price point; if John can only burn his CD onto one computer, why would he pay as much as if he could transfer it between all of his media equipment[3]?

In light of new research indicating that filesharing leads to a growth in music sales, alternate interpretations of copyright law's ideal function deserve some consideration:

From an artist's perspective, consider the Hip-Hop boom of the 1990s; sampling of copyrighted material was integral to the creation of new hip-hop. Without copyright infringement, the music industry would most likely not have had such an array of artists to market and revenue would suffer as a reult[3]. Additionally, artists have a longstanding tradition of freely borrowing each other's work in creating their own[3]. Notable for this practice are Morrisey, Oscar Wilde, and Jim Jarmusch. Considering the mass of creative work that depends on intertextual utilization of source material, looser copyright restrictions, or copyright restrictions designed to enable artists rather than staunchly protecting publisher's exclusive rights to control use, could actually benefit both the creative community and the publishing companies by enabling artists to create more media on their own terms.

Other

Other motivations for censorship, however, may include the moral disapproval of what individuals may do with the information, as apposed to disapproval of the information itself. For example, information on bomb making is, in itself, non threatening, however, what individuals may choose to do with this information can be very threatening.

  • Inherently Harmful Access: "This view holds that accessing some content is simply inherently bad" (Censorship 2008 pp. 580) (See also: Kay Mathiesen).
Parody that satirically states the advantages of pornography as a jab at censorship.
  • Instrumentally Harmful Access: Content is censored for the concern that harm to another may be a consequence to unrestricted access to certain information (See also: Kay Mathiesen).
The Anarchist Cookbook is an example of information that may be considered instrumentally harmful.
  • Maps: Many maps, especially online, are censored for military purposes. For example, Google Maps redacts, or shows out-dated, images of certain restricted areas of the world.

Should we censor?

There are several implications associated with censorship. It is interesting to note that censorship can be used to do two completely opposite things. It can either silence people, or it can protect them.

Protection

As a form of protection, censorship is used to classify all types of content according to age restrictions. This kind of content classification allows people to express what the intended audience is before it makes it into the hands of anyone in the community. On a similar note, censorship of confidential information such as a business's private information can allow stakeholders to reserve information that should not be seen by the public. In that case, it can protect personal privacy and identities of certain persons who are considered to be "at risk."

Silence

However, some contend that censorship and redaction of certain information that is deemed not fit for the public eye can bring up issues of information transparency. This is not good for the case of the business person attempting to earn the trust and loyalty of his or her customers. The customer may not find it easy or possible to trust the business person to make a fair deal, if the company cannot be trusted as a whole to not hide information from the public.

Governments have been accused of censoring information in the name of maintaining civil order and protecting citizens. The government of Pakistan censors text messages that express anti-government sentiment. This example violates the ethical use of censorship because it is in violation basic civil rights. In Cuba, the government censors the use of the Internet. People's browsing histories are monitored and censored such that only pro-government content is allowed to be made publicly available. Censorship should not be used to impede and stifle human expression by violating a person's basic civil rights including freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Ethical Implications

While some people agree that censorship is wrong as a whole, often people will agree that some level of censorship is ethical and necessary. The ethical dilemmas arise when deciding on acceptable degrees of censorship. There is often a fine line between freedom of speech and security and privacy.

Content

Protecting children from disturbing content such as violence and obscenities and inappropriate sexual content is ethically important. However, if one replaces or removes content that another has produced or is forbidden from discussing certain topics because they are too controversial, then freedom of speech is not maintained and civil liberties are violated. Ethical censorship is that which protects an individual or group from harm without interfering with a person's civil liberties.

Unethical censorship is that which disregards freedom of speech without considering the civil liberties of all parties involved. For example, in the case of WikiLeaks, it was maintained by the founders of the site that destroying the government's censorship was an acceptable action even if put certain individuals' lives at risk. In this case, it is difficult to determine whether or not the censorship is ethical. Withholding valuable information from the public is widely considered unethical. However, it also unethical to put people's lives at risk. Therefore, censorship should only be used to better the community and protect people from harm. It should not be used to avoid controversial issues or withhold useful information.

Censors

Another ethical dilemma arises when determining who has the authority to censor. In the context of offline media such as in movies, magazines, newspapers, or books, the authority of censorship falls into the hands of those producing the media. In the online world though, it is much more difficult to determine these responsibilities. Some argue that censorship is only ethical if Internet censorship is restricted to a personal level. One person or group censoring information from another person or group is considered to be a violation of the other party's civil liberties.

While others support the idea of Internet censorship by the government, on June 26, 1997, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the internet was fully protected by the first amendment to the US Constitution. The US Supreme Court ruled that the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which had banned the communication of "obscene or indecent" material through the internet to anyone under the age of 18, was a violation of freedom of speech. In order to maintain an ethical environment on the Internet, it is the individual's responsibilities to monitor his or herself. It is up to the individual to determine what information is false or obscene for his or herself. In the online environment, it is not ethical to allow one entity to censor everything. The responsibility to decide what censorship is ethical is that of organizations and individuals and is depend on the context of the censorship.

See Also

References

  1. Wikipedia - Censorship
  2. "Censorship and Access to Expression" The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics, 2008. https://ctools.umich.edu/access/content/attachment/aaaaaee7-1694-481e-95b6-090bdec54ec2/Assignments/227d63b0-669c-4a3e-9399-23a8f97ad737/MediaWiki%20Writing%20Assignment.pdf
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 Snapper, John. The Matter of Plagarism: What, Why, and If? in The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Himma, K. and Tavani, H., eds. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience. 2008.

External Links

(back to index)