Is censorship a good or bad idea?

Censorship is the suppression or other public communication, which may be considered as objectionable, harmful, sensitive etc as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It is when the something can be banned or edited and changed to fit the audience and their views; this can be with many different types of media from books to films. Censorship is said to protect people from things that could potentially harm them or cause them discomfort in some way. Or it can be used in order to promote or restrict political or religious views. It can also happen for a number of different reasons, one being for national security reasons, this kind of information has to be protected as it could potentially cause harm to many people. This can also be used to keep people from ideas, which could actually harm people as important information can be held; this shows the disadvantages of censorship and why some people can strongly disagree with the use of it. An example of someone using censorship to protect people from something they see as inappropriate would be when Harry Potter was banned from certain states in America and some catholic schools in the UK as they deemed this series to be promoting witchcraft. I personally have very mixed feelings and opinions on censorship as I do feel that in some cases it can resolve a lot of issues, but then I can understand that in some cases censorship can get taken too far and can be used to cover up valuable and important information that could potentially effect people in a negative way if it isnt told. Gagging orders are another thing that people use to with hold information and keep other people from saying certain things. If someone has a gagging order against them it means that they cant discuss anything to do with the subject they have been banned to mention. For example, John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat, used parliamentary privilege to disclose that Ryan Giggs had obtained an injunction to prevent details of an alleged adulterous affair being published. Mr Hemming took matters into his own hands after 75,000 Twitter users and a Scottish newspaper named the Manchester United star as the player who had allegedly conducted a relationship with Imogen Thomas, a former reality television star. His intervention rode roughshod over a gagging order that was upheld in two hearings yesterday, as two judges insisted that Giggs should remain anonymous. I feel that this is a good method and can also stop the amount of censorship as it means that people wont be able to say things by law, meaning that they wont have to use censorship as well. However this can be used in negative ways as it can sometimes be used too frequently and as the easy option for some people and I feel it should be used in only very important circumstances and also should be used as a last resort. The Independent found that more than 333 gagging orders protecting the identities of celebrities, children and private individuals have been granted in the past five years. I feel that this evidence shows that even though some of these cases may have been used in an emergency that some of them wont have been and may have even been covering something very important that other people may need to know. This shows there are negatives to gagging orders as it can be used too frequently, they can also be very dangerous in some cases as they can be used to make someone hide something extremely

important and even things that other people need to know. Gagging orders are used a lot in crime to protect criminals, witnesses and victims so that rumors and stories are made out of this crime; they also use gagging orders in these situations to protect the people and also change the criminals identities and use the gagging orders to make sure that there identity isnt revealed to anyone. I feel that putting a gagging order on the victims and witnesses as it can be really useful and protect them from being harmed or stories being spread about them. However I do think that the criminals dont deserve protection in some cases as they put themselves in this situation, but I only think that this shouldnt be used on the criminals if they have committed a very serious crime such as murder or rape. Overall I feel that gagging orders can be a very useful method to use as it can protect many people, however I dont agree that they should be used all the time or as a first option and shouldnt be used if the information being held is vitally important for the public interest. I feel that censorship can be used in a very positive and effective way as it can be used to protect children from inappropriate things, for example if something deemed inappropriate is online there can be parental control that can block children from seeing this type of thing. There is also age restrictions on a lot of things, like films as the parent can then judge whether they want their child to watch it or not. The blocking of particular websites on the internet is also used a lot in schools, I strongly agree with this as it is protecting children from a lot of things that could be harmful, this also stops a child from innocently searching something in a search engine and the internet coming up with many inappropriate websites. There are also many cases of censorship that occur with print media as many books are banned from being used. There a re many magazines that I feel are highly inappropriate that are actually directed at children, yet they are covered with false images, for example young children are, accessing images of thousands of unnaturally slim and digitally enhanced, blemish-free young women that are posted all over the internet and also even used in magazines for very young children and teens, I believe that the censorship should be stopping this as there is strong evidence that this directly affects the self-esteem of developing girls and is linked directly with the development of eating disorders. I think that there should be some sort of censorship on some magazines, especially if they are targeted at young children as it puts an image in young girls heads that the look of these models is perfect and they then aspire to be just like them. An example of censorship being put in place in a book would be, The removal of Alan Moore's graphic novel Neonomicon from the shelves of a library in South Carolina as it was described as censorship by free speech campaigners. I feel that this shows that the censorship can stop from children viewing or reading things that arent appropriate for their age range. However I do feel that this could of possibly just been censored in the sense that it got an age range for its readers to avoid younger people reading the novel instead of banning it all together. There was also the case of the book of mice and men being banned and was the second most frequently banned book in the 1990s, and it has been called vulgar and offensive. I personally dont agree with this as this book is used a lot for educational purposed in schools and the book doesnt lie or exaggerate as it

just explains how life was like in the 1930s in America. There have been many censorship issues involving education, especially in America as some schools as in Kansas a candidate on the Board of Education is seeking the complete removal of the Theory of Evolution from public schools. I feel this is very strict and also this is disrupting and negatively effecting childrens education as they could possibly need or want to know this, especially if they want to go in to a career involved with science. I also feel that it is the childs choice whether they want to study this or not. Censorship can also help people as it can protect the publics interest and welfare as the media can gain lots of information and sometimes this information can potentially harm a lot of people, I feel in these circumstances censorship is essential as it avoids people being worried and causing harm to them as well. For example when the epidemic of the world coming to an end at the end of 2012 many people decided to end their lives before the world ended altogether. The media used this situation to create TV shows, films and articles for newspapers in order to gain money for themselves even though there werent actual facts. I feel that if there had been censorship used on this then the people that had killed themselves would still be alive as the reason for doing so would have been covered up. I feel that this situation could have been prevented by censorship as it can be made positive sometimes, this type of censorship would of saved peoples lives and would have been used to protect the publics welfare. The media usually covers up this kind of thing as it helps the publics interest and could clearly harm the audience as it did with the epidemic of the end of the world. The internet plays a big part in censorship as many things have to be edited, banned or blocked from the public this is especially an issue in other countries as they feel that some things on the internet can be extremely offensive and in some cases have a lot stricter rulings than in the UK. For example, in India the government tried to get Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and Google to screen and remove offensive content related to political leaders and religious figures. The Web sites refused to do so. I feel that this shows how other countries can class something as very offensive, yet in other countries they wouldnt feel the same at all. There is also a lot of censorship that goes on in many other countries including: In Australia the government failed to introduce a mandatory filtering scheme, several Australian Internet service providers decided to do the filtering on their own, blocking access to 500 sites. And, in Turkey they tried to ban YouTube and Word press as they deemed the sites to be insulting to Turkishness. They also banned certain words that were no longer allowed to be used on the Internet, including: escort, gay and marriageable. I definitely do not agree with this use of censorship as I feel that everyone should have the right to search what ever the want on the internet, and also that websites should only be blocked in extreme circumstances, for example if the website was found to be extremely offensive to someone. I also think that websites should only be banned in work places and schools, as this is a place for people to be educated and a chance for them to do their work. These are extreme examples of censorship being used as some of these countries can have the power to ban many websites and even go as far as to ban words

from being searched on the Internet. I feel that in some cases then censorship can be really useful and stop the public from being put at harm, however I do believe that this can be very dangerous as vital information is sometimes kept from the public that can result in harm for them anyway. On the other hand I do also see the negatives with censorship, as it can be harmful even when its trying to protect and help the public in some cases. I feel that censorship should always be available for people to use; however it does cause many effects debates. This is when there is a debate on the effect that media consumption has on its audience, on one hand some people feel that censorship is really useful and can help a lot in some cases, however many people argue that the media can have negative effects on people. For example, if someone constantly played games that included violence in them, that person would eventually have a more violent and aggressive personality as a result of playing these games. Video games are the most common media product to contain a lot of violence as 97% of 12-17 year olds in the US played video games in 2008 and many people feel that these types of games desensitize players to violence, reward players for simulating violence, and teach children that violence is an acceptable way to resolve conflicts. These games are also said to be one of the possible causes of increases of bullying and violence towards women. I also think that this links in with the culmination theory as it says that media has a big impact on the audience and can effect what they do or say. This debate is also related to the hypodermic needle theory, as some people believe that if a person plays violent games, they will be a violent person. Many people are studied to test if this debate and theory has any truth to it, the most studied groups are younger as they are children, and teens and young adults as these groups are thought to be the most vulnerable. This debate is very questionable but I feel that censorship can help settle these debates as it can change certain games to make them less violent, or it can raise the age restrictions so that the childs parent can see what age the game has been made for and if they want their child playing them. I personally feel that some people can be strongly influenced, especially if the person is younger as they are then brought up around these games and may become de-sensitised sometimes, as they will be so used to seeing it all the time. However I dont think that all people are like this and that censorship can help as they can raise the age limits if the games are found to be too inappropriate for a younger audience. I also think that print media can highly influence people no matter what their age, as they will find people in the magazines that they look up to and aspire to be like. I think that many people will try to mimic the models and will want to be just like them, it is also a lot harder to put age limits on print products like magazines and books but I do think that certain things should have a limit on them, however I dont think there should be an age limit on magazines as I feel they should be available for as anyone and are quite obvious just by looking at the cover at who it is targeted as. But I do think they should possibly not use as much editing and airbrushing as it can affect a lot of people and make them want to change themselves to fit in and look like the models they see on the covers. There are many people that try to fight for no airbrushing or a limit use in magazines. For example, Britain's Royal College of Psychiatrists are pushing the government to regulate

airbrushing. A growing body of research is linking repeated exposure to thin bodies to a drop in mood, more dissatisfaction with the viewer's own body and drastic dieting behaviour. This is a clear example of current debates going on to stop airbrushing being used or at least decrease the amount used as it gives an unrealistic vision of beauty. However there are people fighting against this and believe that airbrushing shouldnt be changed and should just stay as it is, as a London based fashion photographer has said that he thinks media is driven by the consumer, magazines should be an icon for looking your best. Readers know what they get are the most glamorous, the best-looking girls. It's always been that way." Here we see that he completely dismisses the fact that this extreme airbrushing is having serious effects on young girls and is also ruining their self-esteem. I personally feel that this just shows that censorship wont be used on magazines until everyone finally agrees that it is a negative thing, I also dont feel that the editing and airbrushing need to be entirely stopped I just feel that it needs to be limited, especially on magazines that are targeted at younger audiences. There are many advertisements that are used to draw their potential consumers in, however they do it in a way that can trick their viewers. For example there are many gambling and pay day loan adverts that are commonly used on TV, radio, magazines and online. Because they cover such a vast range of the media I feel that this gives them a higher power and also much more control over people as they will hear and see these adverts all the time, resulting in them remembering the company that is being advertised. It has also been shown that these types of adverts were being played in the daytime and also on childrens channels, as there has been lots of this kind of adverts shown on channels such as nickelodeon and cartoon network. This is all linked in with the culmination theory, as they will see the adverts all the time and grow up seeing and listening to them, this will make younger children remember loans and gambling adverts. I think that advertising things such as gambling and pay day loans is very inappropriate if it is being seen on childrens channels as even though they wont understand it they will still be listening and seeing them, this can lead to them remembering this advert if it is played constantly whilst they watch TV. Payday loan companies spent more than 500,000 advertising on children's TV over the past two years, this shows the extent that some of the companies are willing to pay just to be advertised on TV. It has also been shown that children aged from four to 15 years old viewed 596 million payday loan ads in 2012, according to new research from Ofcom, this means the average child in the four- to 15 age range saw 70 payday loan ads last year. I feel that this is really inappropriate and there should be censorship on these kind of adverts as I feel that they should only be played on channels that adults are likely to view and also have a watershed on them so that they can only be seen after a certain time. However I do also think that these types of adverts should be advertised at all as they can be potentially dangerous and both can get you in to a lot of debt instead of doing what they say and helping you with money. I feel that the only time you should see these things is if you have searched them directly yourself and are wanting to go on to these adverts. This kind of censorship would be very useful I feel as there are so many pay day loan adverts in particular that are

aired everyday, I feel that this is increasing the peoples money troubles instead of helping. I also think that they shouldnt be advertised because they are already known to people, therefore if you wanted to go on to one of these sites you can do it without all of the advertising telling you to do so. The committees of advertising practice (CAP) are the organization that designs the advertising codes and they deal with the adverts and the children that could potentially view it. They sort it out in to four different categories whilst organizing the different adverts and sorting whats appropriate and what isnt, the codes are: harm, credulity and unfair pressure, direct exhortation and parental authority, and promotion. These four categories help the organization to sort through the adverts. There is also another organization that works in advertising, the advertising standards authority. The ASA are responsible for enforcing the advertising rules that all adverts have to pass through to be allowed to be aired, these help with some censorship as they have the authority to cancel any adverts they dont find appropriate and they can also ask the company to edit or change the advert to make it suitable for viewing by the public. Overall I still feel that my feelings are very mixed as I think that censorship as a whole has some very good points and also some negative ones. Firstly I think that it is a very good method and idea as it can protect people and save information from coming out and potentially hurting people. It can also have the power to cancel or edit an advert, TV show, print product and many other things as if it gets many complaints then in some cases people can get a censorship on it and have it changed. However I do feel that it has its negatives as it can hide vital and very important information that needs to be shared for the welfare and interest of the public in certain cases or I feel that it can be used far to frequently. I only feel that censorship should be used as a last resort instead of it just being used in unnecessary in some cases. Censorship can also have its negatives as it can mean that many things can be banned or edited. For example some books are banned and destroyed if someone finds it inappropriate even though in some cases these books can be used for informational or educational purposes meaning that people then miss out on learning and gaining information from the media product. I just feel that censorship can be used in many different ways that can either highly benefit people, however it can also hurt people and have very negative effects.