Censorship in a Liberal Society - Research Paper Example

 Introduction Censorship is the expression or writing repression, which is considered coarse, lewd and excessively controversial. All over the history, various societies practiced multiple forms of suppression or censorship in the community beliefs and practices that was responsible for individual molding. Society censorship is the oppression or restriction of mass communication and expression that is labeled offensive, disastrous and objectionable. Various forms of community censorship occur such as moral, religious, public and socio-political. Yet, censorship is a controversial act within largely organized communities and therefore, it is crucial for people to analyze the limitations, advantages and effects of censorship in the society. The discussion will investigate society censorship as violation of people’s rights and justice. Discussion Society censorship in the modern perspective is linked with enormous, complex metropolitan societies with an increased level of federal authority and technical strategies of efficiently reaching the public domain. It includes the determination of things that can or cannot (culturally and legally) be expressed or communicated to wider public in the light of a certain socio-political, spiritual, artistic and traditional standards, (Roleff 52). Society censorship may entail suppressing, revising or altering existing information and preventing creation of such information. In order to withhold or prevent the material from the wider audience, offensive, indecent and harmful content to the public welfare is repressed or controlled. This act infringes people’s freedom to receive and access vital information concerning their society and lives. Any societal or cultural level of rule, whether customary or codified, prohibiting self-expression (such as nudity, hair dos, facial expression, figure or body beautification, use of language) or repression and surveillance of individual communication ( through email or mobile phone) is expressed as a censorship form. This act compromises the liberty and right to free expression and infringes personal privacy, (Hyland and Neil 13). Experts agree that state-supported attempts to regulate public communication (through pictures, symbols and writings) validated by claims of safeguarding the interests of the public, a form with crucial effects for a democratic society is a violation of human rights, freedoms and justice. This is because those in favor of censorship presumes that some ideas and expression form (expressed in books, films and media outlets) are a threat to societal, state, corporate and individual well-being as dictated by powerful individuals, or people engaged in moral crusade and, thus should be prohibited. Censorship in this sense presupposes crucial standards that should not be infringed. Similarly, Censoring in books, articles, films and plays only compromises people entertainment value. Various censorship measures believe that all people including children are vulnerable and require protection for offensive practices and materials – such as pornography, radical political and religious power criticisms. This violates human rights and freedom because people should be trusted to make their own decisions on what they want to see, listen to and read or willingly form their opinions about it, (Clor 12). Some radical thinkers argue that certain censorships is increasingly symbolic, providing a way to promote social unity by avoiding affronts to common morals and values (for example flag burning prohibition). This may be a moral education for as with ban on racialist or supremacist speech, or masquerading under increased standards of public morals and welfare protection, may mainly entail the wish to safeguard the desires of socio-politically, economically and spiritually authoritative individuals by suppressing alternative opinions, criticisms and controversial information. This is against the law because all people are equal before the law and human rights and freedoms apply to all people irrespective of status, cultural background, creed and heritage. Similarly, society censorship in this perspective only protects the rights and interest of the powerful individuals while oppressing the right of the poor voiceless people, (Parker and Betty 47). Cultural censorship is seen as infringement to people’s rights to free communication, expression and belief that is broadly valued in all societies. Similarly, under the UN charter, liberty and expression rights are fundamental human rights. Cultural and individual censorious attacks on movies, articles and books trigger heightened demand for the prohibited work instead of limiting its access. The society through its cultures and tradition has no right to control and limit people’s creativity and innovation (movies such as pornography and art). This is because there are cultural disparities between people and people have the right to choose and join the culture and beliefs of their choice. Some cultural practices and beliefs may seem offensive and indecent to some societies but right and healthy to others. Therefore, societies should understand that people have the right to express and practice their cultural beliefs and morals without any restriction, (Roleff 85). The best way to unity and harmonize the society is to instill morals and values on people and allow them to choose and practices what best suits their desires and interests. Society censorship violates educational rights of the teenage and children because if the society censors all the sex-related topics, it is hard for parents to teach their children about the challenges related to HIV/AIDS and STIs. This only encourages withholding of crucial ideas and information leading illiteracy and ignorance in the society. Societies and religious in favor for music and film censorship argue that certain artists’ musical languages are vulgar, offensive and rude. Additionally, since music is performed in media outlets including TV and radio that people listen to, most societies would not like their members to listen to such indecent languages, (Caso 45). Some artists react to this cultural and parental idea and argue that currently, there are no regulations about films and music censorship. Art work with firm language, racist opinions and offensive references always have such tag on it. This implies that people can purchase the songs but should know the content of the song. Therefore, artists assert that societal censorship is an approach to hinder free flow of knowledge and ideas and encroaches upon press freedom. Conclusion Although some people argue that censorship is a vital mechanism in every society, society censorship may have various legal and technical consequences. Therefore, societies and regulatory institutions should use censorship judiciously to censor only the harmful practices and behaviors such as murder and violence that infringe human rights. In other words, I believe society censorship has no place and value in a democratic society and works against people’s creativity. Similarly, various societies support free expression and label society censorship as an infringement of valuable social beliefs and norms. Works cited Caso, Frank. Censorship. New York: Facts On File, 2008. Internet resource. Clor, Harry. Obscenity and Public Morality: Censorship in a Liberal Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009. Print. Hyland, Paul, and Neil Sammells. Writing and Censorship in Britain. London: Routledge, 1992. Print. Parker, Franklin, and Betty Parker. Behind Textbook Censorship. , 1987. Print. Roleff, Tamara . Censorship: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego, Calif: Greenhaven Press, 2002. Print. Read More