Should the authorities control what is show in TV - Essay Example

Should the ities control what is shown on television? Censorship of television is a divisive issue among many people these days. Some argue that everyone has the right to freedom of speech and thus television should not contain any censorship at all. The basis for this argument is that it should be up to the individual whether or not something is appropriate for them. On the other hand, those in support of television censorship would argue that the state has the right to protect its civilians from anything that may be deemed harmful or controversial.

They would say that the authorities were put in place by the majority of the population so this gives them the right to ban something they may deem offensive. This essay will present both sides of the argument and will debate the pros and cons of each. Those who argue against censorship of television would say that the state has no right to interfere with the lives of its citizens. The state regulates television programming based on commissions that it has set up in order to look into this issue.

The state has a role to protect its citizens from harmful programming that may offend a significant amount of viewers. Where people disagree with state censorship of television is that one particular thing may be censored but not another. What are the guidelines and boundaries that are used to determine whether something is suitable or not for television? Who is in charge of deciding what to censor and what not to censor? Opponents of television censorship would say that they are educated enough to make their own decisions about what is appropriate for them and their families.

It should be the role of the state to provide as much television programming as possible and then the individual viewer can decide if something is okay or not. Basically, this comes down to first amendment rights—a citizen has the freedom of speech to choose what he may or may not do. This is in line with the principle of democracy, where an open and honest society is to be encouraged. In comparison, supporters of television censorship would argue that there are harmful and violent views out there that may offend citizens who want to remain peaceful.

These people believe that the authorities have the right to regulate television programming because that is the power that they hold. The state must censor content that may provoke violence and cause conflict between its citizens. This is most commonly seen in third-world countries, where the state attempts to limit the information flow to its citizens under the guise of “protecting” them. However, this view goes against everything that democracy stands for, which is freedom of speech. Once the state starts censoring television, it may set a bad precedent.

In conclusion, we can say that there are strong arguments for both views of television censorship. However, in line with basic democratic principles, we must conclude that television censorship goes against the common belief of the people—citizens have the right to choose what to and what not to do.