The debate on the issue of censorship

In the United States, the argument about censorship has grown significantly in popularity. Many education stakeholders have participated in various consultation forums to address censorship. Yet, there are two opposing viewpoints on the matter. Censorship is supported by one party due to continual media misrepresentation of certain facts. The protagonists, on the other hand, read mischief and deny the allegations of pro-censorship ideas (Heng,et al.2002). Censorship should be defined as the government-sanctioned prohibition of publishing or manufacturing specified reading materials. Censorship can occur for a variety of reasons, including the publication of perceived politically sensitive items, religiously inappropriate content, and morally condemned materials, among others. However, the underlying debate is based on ascertaining the facts behind censorship. Considering the chances of frustrating creativity and sitting on media freedom, censorship needs to stop. It is therefore imperative that a critical review of censorship merits and demerits is discussed to establish supported arguments that show why it should be shunned.

Censorship has become an obstacle in the learning process and particularly the young generation’s future is under threat. The ensuing debate on the planned suppression of information sharing has been the strong point against censorship. Owing to the information and communication technology explosion, daily survival of humanity has since become too dependent on information. The widespread suppression of media, publishers, and scholars is recipe to imperfect information’s overriding challenge is among the learners who need freedom to explore personal talent and exhaustively seek knowledge without limits. It is surprising that the society appreciates art and creativity but tactically frustrate the same through censorship (Heng,et al.2002). Making the right or wrong choice can only be learnt with time and through experience. Meanwhile learners should be allowed to exploit their imaginations through writing, reading, and watching.

There are several societal challenges associated with censorship. Promotion of negative agenda is one of the identifiable issues associated with it. Political leadership and governments take advantage of censorship to promote unaccountability. In fact, the observed trend of misusing censorship to avoid public scrutiny and advance policies with negative consequences is detrimental to a country (Kizza, 2010). Manipulation of facts by mischievous politicians is facilitated by censorship of any perceived whistleblowing. As such, the society must do what it takes to stifle such politically motivated censorship.

Censorship imposes restrictions on people’s right to express ideas in writing or speaking. As such, it suppresses the right to exercise fundamental rights. Censorship has proved to be an effective tool to prevent people from expressing divergent views that constitute constructive criticism. Censorship is therefore a violation on the fundamental rights to citizens. In schools, students need to be free to ask questions on books and other learning materials. Imposing a ban on specific publications or topics instils fear and is likely to suppress mental development.

The cultural relativism is an aspect that is affected by censorship. People have the right to exercise their morals. Considering cultural diversity, what may be considered immoral by one party may not necessarily be bad to others. As such, censorship seems to be selective in its attempts to prevent expression of some norms. What may be deemed morally correct creates a subjective environment in which diversity or change may not be tolerated. The result is an imbalanced society with a closed way of thinking and resistant to change. Censorship therefore kills the spirit of expressing individual values towards improvement of the general welfare of members of the society.

The students are encouraged to participate in the learning process rather than taking a passive position. In that regard, expressing personal opinion as a contribution towards learning constitute divergent ideas. Some of such self-invented ideas may be suppressed by censorship at the expense of development. Historical figures like Disney defied odds to build great business empires. A recall on Disney’s path to success was characterized by restrictions part of which reflected censorship. Even weird ideas at first turns out to become useful to the society(Kizza, 2010).. As such attempts to censor what students should say or write effectively erode the brighter future. Innovation requires deviation from normal way of doing things. However, censorship offers a blanket ban that consumes creative minds. Several projects in the world have been successful as a result of collaboration and financing. Censorship is a huddle that presents retrogressive process.

The techniques of writing and speech are sharpened through creative learning among students. Censorship on some topics may compel a potential journalist or author to sit on a future. The ills that affect the society are exposed through media (Heng,et al.2002). While the perpetrators wish to cover up grave mistakes committed against humanity in various ways, it takes satire and open criticism with factual evidence to burst perpetrators. In fact, media personalities are the most influential in informing the society and the common target of censorship.

Business malpractices have always been facilitated by politically motivated censorship. Considering the influence of corporates in supporting political regimes, there interests that may be oppressive such as monopoly may be covered through censorship. As such, censorship may be misused to advance destructive economic, social, and political agendas. On the same note, financially stable multinationals have always facilitated censorship of their competitors through indirectly financing lobbyists.

The observed religiously motivated crimes like terrorism can also be attributed to censorship. The strong spiritual attachment that people have with religion has been a dangerous thing to play with. For instance, constant suppression of Islamic materials is blamed on upsurge of radical groups and terrorism. As such before censorship, it is critical to undertake a participatory decision making to avoid expressing a selective approach (Caso, 2008). In fact, religious freedom must be allowed and unexplained censorship may have counterproductive effects as the victims may consider it persecution. The result is heightened energy of martyrdom that overlaps to practices that amount to extremism and radicalism. Religious and political tolerance is only possible in an environment where moderate regulations are put in place. Otherwise, any effort to blacklist specific religious communities is seen in the light of intolerance which in itself violates freedom to religion

Although opponents of censorship vouch for its end, there are arguments that support it. The increasing influx of obscene content in social media and mainstream media justify censorship. Young people are at the risk of taking up immoral behaviors with consequences of uncertain future. Vulgar language, pornographic content, violent videos, politically intolerant language, religious extremism and radical ideology are all over the media and needs to be stopped. Although criticism is good, misleading criticism from partisan media personalities, leaders, and individuals contravenes the interest of the society. As such censorship may apply to control the line of thinking and information relayed to the public.

Although censorship is good for creativity, the originality of content must be observed. As such authors may be at liberty to publish but any sign of plagiarism justify censorship. It is important to control freedom of speech in the interest of peace. As such, sensitive religious or political statements must be shunned even if such may be deemed oppressive.

Comparative analysis of supporters and protagonists of censorship tend to show a progressive society in favor of the latter. The effect of globalization can only be managed through freedom of information exchange. Censorship is dictatorship and should be stopped. In schools, even tutors have a challenge in adjusting teaching curriculum to accommodate censorship (Caso, 2008). The idea of censorship needs further scholarly research through collaborative participation of parents, public, media, and government. The assertion against censorship has better prospects to the modern society than otherwise.

References

Caso, F. (2008). Censorship.

Heng, R. H.-K., Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Workshop on Media and Transition in ASEAN, & Workshop on Media and Transition in ASEAN. (2002). Media fortunes, changing times: ASEAN states in transition ; [papers originally presented to a Workshop on Media and Transition in ASEAN, 20 - 21 November 2000, Singapore]. Singapore: Inst. of Southeast Asian Studies.

Kizza, J. M. (2010). Ethical and social issues in the information age. London: Springer.