censorship essay

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

15.4 Censorship and Freedom of Speech

Learning objectives.

• Explain the FCC’s process of classifying material as indecent, obscene, or profane.
• Describe how the Hay’s Code affected 20th-century American mass media.

Figure 15.3

Attempts to censor material, such as banning books, typically attract a great deal of controversy and debate.

Timberland Regional Library – Banned Books Display At The Lacey Library – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

To fully understand the issues of censorship and freedom of speech and how they apply to modern media, we must first explore the terms themselves. Censorship is defined as suppressing or removing anything deemed objectionable. A common, everyday example can be found on the radio or television, where potentially offensive words are “bleeped” out. More controversial is censorship at a political or religious level. If you’ve ever been banned from reading a book in school, or watched a “clean” version of a movie on an airplane, you’ve experienced censorship.

Much as media legislation can be controversial due to First Amendment protections, censorship in the media is often hotly debated. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press (Case Summaries).” Under this definition, the term “speech” extends to a broader sense of “expression,” meaning verbal, nonverbal, visual, or symbolic expression. Historically, many individuals have cited the First Amendment when protesting FCC decisions to censor certain media products or programs. However, what many people do not realize is that U.S. law establishes several exceptions to free speech, including defamation, hate speech, breach of the peace, incitement to crime, sedition, and obscenity.

Classifying Material as Indecent, Obscene, or Profane

To comply with U.S. law, the FCC prohibits broadcasters from airing obscene programming. The FCC decides whether or not material is obscene by using a three-prong test.

Obscene material:

• causes the average person to have lustful or sexual thoughts;
• depicts lawfully offensive sexual conduct; and
• lacks literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Material meeting all of these criteria is officially considered obscene and usually applies to hard-core pornography (Federal Communications Commission). “Indecent” material, on the other hand, is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be banned entirely.

Indecent material:

• contains graphic sexual or excretory depictions;
• dwells at length on depictions of sexual or excretory organs; and
• is used simply to shock or arouse an audience.

Material deemed indecent cannot be broadcast between the hours of 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., to make it less likely that children will be exposed to it (Federal Communications Commission).

These classifications symbolize the media’s long struggle with what is considered appropriate and inappropriate material. Despite the existence of the guidelines, however, the process of categorizing materials is a long and arduous one.

There is a formalized process for deciding what material falls into which category. First, the FCC relies on television audiences to alert the agency of potentially controversial material that may require classification. The commission asks the public to file a complaint via letter, e-mail, fax, telephone, or the agency’s website, including the station, the community, and the date and time of the broadcast. The complaint should “contain enough detail about the material broadcast that the FCC can understand the exact words and language used (Federal Communications Commission).” Citizens are also allowed to submit tapes or transcripts of the aired material. Upon receiving a complaint, the FCC logs it in a database, which a staff member then accesses to perform an initial review. If necessary, the agency may contact either the station licensee or the individual who filed the complaint for further information.

Once the FCC has conducted a thorough investigation, it determines a final classification for the material. In the case of profane or indecent material, the agency may take further actions, including possibly fining the network or station (Federal Communications Commission). If the material is classified as obscene, the FCC will instead refer the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice, which has the authority to criminally prosecute the media outlet. If convicted in court, violators can be subject to criminal fines and/or imprisonment (Federal Communications Commission).

Each year, the FCC receives thousands of complaints regarding obscene, indecent, or profane programming. While the agency ultimately defines most programs cited in the complaints as appropriate, many complaints require in-depth investigation and may result in fines called notices of apparent liability (NAL) or federal investigation.

Table 15.1 FCC Indecency Complaints and NALs: 2000–2005

Violence and Sex: Taboos in Entertainment

Although popular memory thinks of old black-and-white movies as tame or sanitized, many early filmmakers filled their movies with sexual or violent content. Edwin S. Porter’s 1903 silent film The Great Train Robbery , for example, is known for expressing “the appealing, deeply embedded nature of violence in the frontier experience and the American civilizing process,” and showcases “the rather spontaneous way that the attendant violence appears in the earliest developments of cinema (Film Reference).” The film ends with an image of a gunman firing a revolver directly at the camera, demonstrating that cinema’s fascination with violence was present even 100 years ago.

Porter was not the only U.S. filmmaker working during the early years of cinema to employ graphic violence. Films such as Intolerance (1916) and The Birth of a Nation (1915) are notorious for their overt portrayals of violent activities. The director of both films, D. W. Griffith, intentionally portrayed content graphically because he “believed that the portrayal of violence must be uncompromised to show its consequences for humanity (Film Reference).”

Although audiences responded eagerly to the new medium of film, some naysayers believed that Hollywood films and their associated hedonistic culture was a negative moral influence. As you read in Chapter 8 “Movies” , this changed during the 1930s with the implementation of the Hays Code. Formally termed the Motion Picture Production Code of 1930, the code is popularly known by the name of its author, Will Hays, the chairman of the industry’s self-regulatory Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association (MPPDA), which was founded in 1922 to “police all in-house productions (Film Reference).” Created to forestall what was perceived to be looming governmental control over the industry, the Hays Code was, essentially, Hollywood self-censorship. The code displayed the motion picture industry’s commitment to the public, stating:

Motion picture producers recognize the high trust and confidence which have been placed in them by the people of the world and which have made motion pictures a universal form of entertainment…. Hence, though regarding motion pictures primarily as entertainment without any explicit purposes of teaching or propaganda, they know that the motion picture within its own field of entertainment may be directly responsible for spiritual or moral progress, for higher types of social life, and for much correct thinking (Arts Reformation).

Among other requirements, the Hays Code enacted strict guidelines on the portrayal of violence. Crimes such as murder, theft, robbery, safecracking, and “dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc.” could not be presented in detail (Arts Reformation). The code also addressed the portrayals of sex, saying that “the sanctity of the institution of marriage and the home shall be upheld. Pictures shall not infer that low forms of sex relationship are the accepted or common thing (Arts Reformation).”

Figure 15.4

As the chairman of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association, Will Hays oversaw the creation of the industry’s self-censoring Hays Code.

Wikimedia Commons – public domain.

As television grew in popularity during the mid-1900s, the strict code placed on the film industry spread to other forms of visual media. Many early sitcoms, for example, showed married couples sleeping in separate twin beds to avoid suggesting sexual relations.

By the end of the 1940s, the MPPDA had begun to relax the rigid regulations of the Hays Code. Propelled by the changing moral standards of the 1950s and 1960s, this led to a gradual reintroduction of violence and sex into mass media.

Ratings Systems

As filmmakers began pushing the boundaries of acceptable visual content, the Hollywood studio industry scrambled to create a system to ensure appropriate audiences for films. In 1968, the successor of the MPPDA, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), established the familiar film ratings system to help alert potential audiences to the type of content they could expect from a production.

Film Ratings

Although the ratings system changed slightly in its early years, by 1972 it seemed that the MPAA had settled on its ratings. These ratings consisted of G (general audiences), PG (parental guidance suggested), R (restricted to ages 17 or up unless accompanied by a parent), and X (completely restricted to ages 17 and up). The system worked until 1984, when several major battles took place over controversial material. During that year, the highly popular films Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and Gremlins both premiered with a PG rating. Both films—and subsequently the MPAA—received criticism for the explicit violence presented on screen, which many viewers considered too intense for the relatively mild PG rating. In response to the complaints, the MPAA introduced the PG-13 rating to indicate that some material may be inappropriate for children under the age of 13.

Another change came to the ratings system in 1990, with the introduction of the NC-17 rating. Carrying the same restrictions as the existing X rating, the new designation came at the behest of the film industry to distinguish mature films from pornographic ones. Despite the arguably milder format of the rating’s name, many filmmakers find it too strict in practice; receiving an NC-17 rating often leads to a lack of promotion or distribution because numerous movie theaters and rental outlets refuse to carry films with this rating.

Television and Video Game Ratings

Regardless of these criticisms, most audience members find the rating system helpful, particularly when determining what is appropriate for children. The adoption of industry ratings for television programs and video games reflects the success of the film ratings system. During the 1990s, for example, the broadcasting industry introduced a voluntary rating system not unlike that used for films to accompany all TV shows. These ratings are displayed on screen during the first 15 seconds of a program and include TV-Y (all children), TV-Y7 (children ages 7 and up), TV-Y7-FV (older children—fantasy violence), TV-G (general audience), TV-PG (parental guidance suggested), TV-14 (parents strongly cautioned), and TV-MA (mature audiences only).

Table 15.2 Television Ratings System

Source: http://www.tvguidelines.org/ratings.htm

At about the same time that television ratings appeared, the Entertainment Software Rating Board was established to provide ratings on video games. Video game ratings include EC (early childhood), E (everyone), E 10+ (ages 10 and older), T (teen), M (mature), and AO (adults only).

Table 15.3 Video Game Ratings System

Source: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp

Even with these ratings, the video game industry has long endured criticism over violence and sex in video games. One of the top-selling video game series in the world, Grand Theft Auto , is highly controversial because players have the option to solicit prostitution or murder civilians (Media Awareness). In 2010, a report claimed that “38 percent of the female characters in video games are scantily clad, 23 percent baring breasts or cleavage, 31 percent exposing thighs, another 31 percent exposing stomachs or midriffs, and 15 percent baring their behinds (Media Awareness).” Despite multiple lawsuits, some video game creators stand by their decisions to place graphic displays of violence and sex in their games on the grounds of freedom of speech.

Key Takeaways

• The U.S. Government devised the three-prong test to determine if material can be considered “obscene.” The FCC applies these guidelines to determine whether broadcast content can be classified as profane, indecent, or obscene.
• Established during the 1930s, the Hays Code placed strict regulations on film, requiring that filmmakers avoid portraying violence and sex in films.
• After the decline of the Hays Code during the 1960s, the MPAA introduced a self-policed film ratings system. This system later inspired similar ratings for television and video game content.

Look over the MPAA’s explanation of each film rating online at http://www.mpaa.org/ratings/what-each-rating-means . View a film with these requirements in mind and think about how the rating was selected. Then answer the following short-answer questions. Each response should be a minimum of one paragraph.

• Would this material be considered “obscene” under the Hays Code criteria? Would it be considered obscene under the FCC’s three-prong test? Explain why or why not. How would the film be different if it were released in accordance to the guidelines of the Hays Code?
• Do you agree with the rating your chosen film was given? Why or why not?

Arts Reformation, “The Motion Picture Production Code of 1930 (Hays Code),” ArtsReformation, http://www.artsreformation.com/a001/hays-code.html .

Case Summaries, “First Amendment—Religion and Expression,” http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/ .

Federal Communications Commission, “Obscenity, Indecency & Profanity: Frequently Asked Questions,” http://www.fcc.gov/eb/oip/FAQ.html .

Film Reference, “Violence,” Film Reference, http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Romantic-Comedy-Yugoslavia/Violence-BEGINNINGS.html .

Media Awareness, Media Issues, “Sex and Relationships in the Media,” http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/women_and_girls/women_sex.cfm .

Media Awareness, Media Issues, “Violence in Media Entertainment,” http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/violence/violence_entertainment.cfm .

Understanding Media and Culture Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• School Education /

Essay on Censorship in 100, 200, and 300+ Words 

• Updated on  
• Feb 15, 2024

Essay on Censorship: Censorship is the practice of examining books, movies and likewise and removing things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, and harmful to society. The authorities in many countries have put certain restrictions or limits on the information and expression that reaches the common public.

The idea behind these restrictions is to take preventive measures that may hurt sentiments and disturb the public order. Regulatory bodies are set up that review and certify films, television shows, and publications before release.

Also Read: Highest Paying Careers in the Entertainment Industry

This Blog Includes:

Essay on censorship 100 words, essay on censorship 200 words, essay on censorship 300+ words.

Censorship is the restriction imposed on the expression of restricted content by the authorities. The basic reasons behind such censorship are based on several reasons, such as maintaining the morals of the public, safeguarding the national interest and security, and controlling harmful content that might be unsafe for the peace of the country. 

While serving the country´s harmonious atmosphere, the different types of censorship bodies in India also face criticism and hatred. Students need to recognise the challenges of censorship and understand the balance between the safety and perspective of the restrictions.

In a world of abundant information, it is the responsibility of citizens to better understand the responsibilities of content that is served via social media, the entertainment industry, and likewise.

Also Read: Top 16 Motivational Movies for Students

India has a complex relationship with censorship. The factors that influence censorship authorities in the country are diversity in culture, societal norms, and political considerations. 

Intending to bring more transparency to the suppression, the Indian government introduced The set-up of authorities regarding the censorship for safeguarding the sentiments of people and society created an impact on various social media platforms. It resulted in restrictions on content such as misleading information, hate speech, and the spread of fake news. However, the implementation of restrictions on the content followed back with sparking debates regarding the fine line between censorship and freedom of expression.

Maintaining peace in a country where diversity in culture plays an important role is not an easy task; it adds a layer of complexity to the decision of the censorship board. What may be acceptable in one culture might be challenging in another. Here censorship plays an important role in balancing the community as well as sentiments by controlling the freedom of expression or keeping it according to the teachings of the religion. 

In conclusion, Censorship in India aims at making and implementing rules that make sure that people from every religion can enjoy movies, shows and more without any disappointment or rage. The practice of creating a balance between different religions not only helps in maintaining peace but also boosts in respecting the differences in our cultures.  

  Also Read: Famous Books and Authors

Censorship refers to the suppression of speech, public communication or other activities or information that may be considered harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient. Censorship can be conducted by governments or other controlling bodies.

The idea behind censorship is that it brings protection for social values, manages order and upholds the national security of the country. When these restrictions are taken too far, however, censorship can greatly impose restrictions on individuals’ human rights and civil liberties. There is always a debate about whether censorship promotes social stability or curtains the freedom of thought and expression of people. 

Censorship takes many forms and targets different kinds of expressions. Governments censor materials that criticise their policies, the area of writing restrictions that might be deemed offensive to the dominant culture, and media alleged to undermine security. Furthermore, artistic works of books, films, plays and music are censored if their content is judged to be obscene or intended to provoke. Educational materials are censored if the information provided is deemed inappropriate, inaccurate, or contradictory to the approved curriculum. The press and journalists also face censorship through control of licensing, lawsuits, and even violence. In the digital age, censorship is imposed as blocking of websites, removing social media posts, and restrictions on online searches.

People who support censorship argue that it protects public morality, prevents offensive or provocative material from society and guards against the spread of false information. However, critics contended that censorship curtains the freedom of expression, thought, belief and idea which are essential for human rights. According to them, in the name of censorship or protecting society political agendas are served by the power or authorities. 

Striking the right balance between freedom and control is the key challenge of censorship. Human rights and free speech are the fundamental principles that should be restricted when it creates harm. Societies that follow democracy should be transparent and should have more openness for the impression of individuals than authoritarian regimes. Furthermore, people and societies should also understand the balance of sensitivity and expression of speech.

In conclusion, censorship in any country is all about taking care of what we see, hear, and read. Also, it takes care of the safety and security of the people. While the laws seem strict in real life, they help protect the values, dignity, and religious practices of people and create a safe environment to live in.

Also Read: Short Note on the Indian Press Act of 1910

Ans. Censorship is the prevention of content like words, images or ideas that are controlled by the government to reach the general public. 

Ans. Another word for censorship is ban or blacklist. 

Ans. Censorship in India is all about taking care of what we see, hear, and read. Also, it takes care of the safety and security of the people.

Ans. Books might get censored due to inappropriate content such as wrong, disturbing content, or written words.  

Related Blogs

For more information on such interesting topics, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu.

Deepika Joshi

Deepika Joshi is an experienced content writer with expertise in creating educational and informative content. She has a year of experience writing content for speeches, essays, NCERT, study abroad and EdTech SaaS. Her strengths lie in conducting thorough research and ananlysis to provide accurate and up-to-date information to readers. She enjoys staying updated on new skills and knowledge, particulary in education domain. In her free time, she loves to read articles, and blogs with related to her field to further expand her expertise. In personal life, she loves creative writing and aspire to connect with innovative people who have fresh ideas to offer.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

Click here for our new feature on Presidents & the First Amendment

An examination of all 46 presidents and their engagement with the First Amendment

• ENCYCLOPEDIA
• IN THE CLASSROOM

Home » Articles » Topic » Issues » Issues Related to Speech, Press, Assembly, or Petition » Censorship

Written by Elizabeth R. Purdy, published on August 8, 2023 , last updated on March 25, 2024

The First Amendment protects American people from government censorship. But the First Amendment's protections are not absolute, leading to Supreme Court cases involving the question of what is protected speech and what is not. On the issue of press freedoms, the Court has been reluctant to censor publication -- even of previously classified material. In the landmark case New York Times v. United States, the Court overturned a court order stopping the newspaper from continuing to print excerpts from the "Pentagon Papers", saying such prior restraint was unconstitutional. In this June 30, 1971 file picture, workers in the New York Times composing room in New York look at a proof sheet of a page containing the secret Pentagon report on Vietnam. (AP Photo/Marty Lederhandler, reprinted with permission from The Associated Press.)

Censorship occurs when individuals or groups try to prevent others from saying, printing, or depicting words and images.

Censors seek to limit freedom of thought and expression by restricting spoken words, printed matter, symbolic messages, freedom of association, books, art, music, movies, television programs, and Internet sites. When the government engages in censorship, First Amendment freedoms are implicated.

Private actors — for example, corporations that own radio stations — also can engage in forms of censorship, but this presents no First Amendment implications as no governmental, or state, action is involved.

Various groups have banned or attempted to  ban books  since the invention of the printing press. Censored or challenged works include the Bible, The American Heritage Dictionary, The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, To Kill A Mockingbird, and the works of children’s authors J. K. Rowling and Judy Blume.

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and press, integral elements of democracy. Since Gitlow v. New York (1925), the Supreme Court has applied the First Amendment freedoms of speech and press to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier (1988) that school officials have broad power of censorship over student newspapers. In this photo, Tammy Hawkins, editor of the Hazelwood East High School newspaper, Spectrum holds a copy of the paper, Jan. 14, 1988. (AP Photo/James A. Finley, used with permission from the Associated Press)

Not all speech is protected by the First Amendment

Freedom of speech and press are not, however, absolute. Over time, the Supreme Court has established guidelines, or tests, for defining what constitutes protected and unprotected speech. Among them are:

• the  bad tendency test , established in  Abrams v. United States  (1919),
• the  clear and present danger test  from  Schenck v. United States  (1919),
• the  preferred freedoms doctrine  of  Jones v. City of Opelika  (1943), and
• the  strict scrutiny , or  compelling state interest , test set out in Korematsu v. United States (1944).

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.  offered the classic example of the line between protected and unprotected speech in Schenck when he observed that shouting “Fire!” in a theater where there is none is not protected speech. Categories of unprotected speech also include:

• libel and slander ,
• “ fighting words ,”
• obscenity , and

Libel and slander when it comes to public officials

Determining when defamatory words may be censored has proved to be difficult for the Court, which has allowed greater freedom in remarks made about public figures than those concerning private individuals.

In  New York Times Co. v. Sullivan  (1964), the Court held that words can be libelous (written) or slanderous (spoken) in the case of public officials only if they involve  actual malice  or publication with knowledge of falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth. Lampooning has generally been protected by the Court.

In  Hustler Magazine v. Falwell  (1988), for example, the Court held that the magazine had not slandered Rev. Jerry Falwell by publishing an outrageous “advertisement” containing a caricature of him because it was presented as parody rather than truth.

On the issue of press freedoms, the Court has been reluctant to censor publication of even previously classified materials, as in  New York Times v. United States (1971) — the  Pentagon Papers  case — unless the government can provide an overwhelming reason for such prior restraint.

The Court has accepted some censorship of the press when it interferes with the right to a fair trial, as exhibited in  Estes v. Texas  (1965) and  Sheppard v. Maxwell  (1966), but the Court has been reluctant to uphold  gag orders , as in the case of  Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart  (1976).

In general, rap and hard-core rock-n-roll have faced more censorship than other types of music. In this photo, rap artists DJ Jazzy Jeff (Jeff Townes), left, and The Fresh Prince (Will Smith) are seen backstage at the American Music Awards ceremony in Los Angeles, Calif., Monday, January 31, 1989, after winning in the category Favorite Rap Artist and Favorite Rap Album. (AP Photo/Lennox McLendon, used with permission from the Associated Press)

When words incite “breach of peace”

In  Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire  (1942), the Supreme Court defined “ fighting words ” as those that “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.” Racial epithets and ethnic derisions have traditionally been unprotected under the umbrella of “fighting words.”

Since the backlash against so-called political correctness, however, liberals and conservatives have fought over what derogatory words may be censored and which are protected by the First Amendment.

Determining whether something is obscene

In its early history, the Supreme Court left it to the states to determine whether materials were obscene.

Acting on its decision in  Gitlow v. New York (1925)  to apply the First Amendment to limit state action, the Warren Court subsequently began dealing with these issues in the 1950s on a case-by-case basis and spent hours examining material to determine obscenity.

In  Miller v. California  (1973), the Burger Court finally adopted a test that elaborated on the standards established in  Roth v. United States (1957) . Miller defines obscenity by outlining three conditions for jurors to consider:

• “(a) whether the ‘average person, applying contemporary community standards,’ would find that the work taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest;
• (b) whether the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law; and
• (c) whether the work taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”

Proposals to  censor music  date back to Plato’s Republic. In the 1970s, some individuals thought anti-war songs should be censored. In the 1980s, the emphasis shifted to prohibiting sexual and violent lyrics. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also sought to fine radio stations for the broadcast of indecent speech. In general,  rap and hard-core rock-n-roll  have faced more censorship than other types of music. Caution must be used in this area to distinguish between governmental censorship and private censorship.

Courts have not interpreted the First Amendment  rights of minors, especially in school settings , to be as broad as those of adults; their speech in school newspapers or in speaking to audiences of their peers may accordingly be censored.

Advancing technology has opened up new avenues in which access to a variety of materials, including obscenity, is open to minors, and Congress has been only partially successful in restricting such access. Parental controls on televisions and computers have provided parents and other adults with some monitoring ability, but no methods are 100 percent effective.

Censorship often increases in wartime to tamp down anti-government speech. In this 1942 photo, W. Holden White, clips items from U.S. newspapers at the Washington, D.C. headquarters of the office of censorship to determine newspaper compliance with censorship rules prescribed by the office. (AP Photo, used with permission from the Associated Press)

Wrestling with sedition and seditious speech

In general, sedition is defined as trying to overthrow the government with intent and means to bring it about; the Supreme Court, however, has been divided over what constitutes intent and means.

In general, the government has been less tolerant of perceived sedition in times of war than in peace. The first federal attempt to censor seditious speech occurred with the passage of the Alien and  Sedition Acts of 1798  under President John Adams.

These acts made it a federal crime to speak, write, or print criticisms of the government that were false, scandalous, or malicious. Thomas Jefferson compared the acts to witch hunts and pardoned those convicted under the statues when he succeeded Adams.

Laws attempting to reduce anti-government speech

During World War I, Congress passed the  Espionage Act of 1917  and the  Sedition Act of 1918 , and the Court spent years dealing with the aftermath.

In 1919 in  Schenck , the government charged that encouraging draftees not to report for duty in World War I constituted sedition. In this case, the court held that Schenck’s actions were, indeed, seditious because, in the words of Justice Holmes, they constituted a “clear and present danger” of a “substantive evil,” defined as attempting to overthrow the government, inciting riots, and destruction of life and property.

In the 1940s and 1950s,  World War II  and the rise of communism produced new limits on speech, and  McCarthyism  destroyed the lives of scores of law-abiding suspected communists.

The  Smith Act of 1940  and the Internal Security Act of 1950, also known as the  McCarran Act , attempted to stamp out communism in the country by establishing harsh sentences for advocating the use of violence to overthrow the government and making the Communist Party of the United States illegal.

After the al-Qaida attacks of September 11, 2001, and passage of the  USA Patriot Act , the United States faced new challenges to civil liberties. As a means of fighting terrorism, government agencies began to target people openly critical of the government. The arrests of individuals suspected of knowing people considered terrorists by the government was in tension with, if not violation of, the First Amendment’s freedom of association. These detainees were held without benefit of counsel and other constitutional rights.

The George W. Bush administration and the courts have battled over the issues of  warrantless wiretaps , military tribunals, and suspension of various rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions, which stipulate acceptable conditions for holding prisoners of war.

Certain forms of speech are protected from censure by governments. For instance, the First Amendment protects pure speech, defined as that which is merely expressive, descriptive, or assertive. Less clearly defined are those forms of speech referred to as speech plus, that is, speech that carries an additional connotation, such as symbolic speech. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), the Court upheld the right of middle and high school students to wear symbolic black armbands to school to protest U.S. involvement in Vietnam. In this photo, Debbie Wallace, left, and Phyllis Sweigert, 17-year-old seniors at suburban Euclid High School in Cleveland, Ohio, display armbands they wore to school in mourning for the dead in Vietnam, Dec. 10, 1965. The girls were suspended from school until Monday. (AP Photo/Julian C. Wilson, used with permission from the Associated Press)

Expressive and symbolic speech

Certain forms of speech are protected from censure by governments. For instance, the First Amendment protects pure speech, defined as that which is merely expressive, descriptive, or assertive. The Court has held that the government may not suppress speech simply because it thinks it is offensive. Even presidents are not immune from being criticized and ridiculed.

Less clearly defined are those forms of speech referred to as speech plus, that is, speech that carries an additional connotation. This includes  symbolic speech , in which meanings are conveyed without words.

In T inker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District  (1969), the Court upheld the right of middle and high school students to wear black armbands to school to protest U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

One of the most controversial examples of symbolic speech has produced a series of  flag desecration  cases, including  Spence v. Washington  (1974),  Texas v. Johnson  (1989), and  United States v. Eichman  (1990).

Despite repeated attempts by Congress to make it illegal to burn or deface the flag, the Court has held that such actions are protected. Writing for the 5-4 majority in Texas v. Johnson, Justice William J. Brennan Jr. stated, “We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.”

When speech turns into other forms of action, constitutional protections are less certain.

In  R.A.V. v. St. Paul  (1992), the Court overturned a local hate crime statute that had been used to convict a group of boys who had burned a cross on the lawn of a black family living in a predominately white neighborhood.

The Court qualified this opinion in  Virginia v. Black  (2003), holding that the First Amendment did not protect such acts when their purpose was intimidation.

This article was originally published in 2009. Elizabeth Purdy, Ph.D., is an independent scholar who has published articles on subjects ranging from political science and women’s studies to economics and popular culture.

Send Feedback on this article

How To Contribute

The Free Speech Center operates with your generosity! Please  donate now!

John Brown University's Student Newspaper

Averting our eyes: The controversy of internet censorship

Pornography. Extremism. Fake News. Few words have as visceral an effect on a person as these. Together, these three items embody almost everything that is wrong in American society. And how has the government responded to their increase? By inviting them in as guests of honor through internet servers around the country.

Since its inception, the internet has been a nearly universal hub of information and activity. Everything from debates, auctions and photo albums is shared across the web in plain view of the public. Unfortunately, the internet contains much more sinister files than these. Pornography, drug deals and explicit content are all only a few clicks away from anyone with access to a computer. In this age, parents are forced to protect the eyes of their children from graphic content and sexual innuendos from the moment they touch their first device. Sexual addictions and crime rates across the country are on the rise and the vulgarity of the internet bears the brunt of the blame.

For years there has been an ongoing argument regarding the subject of internet censorship. Many groups claim that any content that someone desires to put on the web should be allowed to be posted. Others staunchly believe that the internet has become too explicit and harmful to be allowed to continue unchecked.

I believe that there is a difference between the restriction of useful information that can be applied and evaluated freely by consumers and the restriction of material that has little to no positive application. To be clear, I don’t believe that the internet needs to be dismantled. It is a wonderful tool with limitless potential for the improvement of mankind. But, I also believe that it is a tool that can easily be misused. Evil was not born on the day the internet was created, but it was given a new foster home. In the days of newspapers and encyclopedias, evil things were still captured and mass-produced but not on the scale that the internet allows them to be.

Much of the content on the internet including pornographic websites fall within that category of harmful material. These are things that have no potential to improve society and serve as a stumbling block to many who are exposed to them. We are becoming a culture that is more addicted, sexualized and uncaring than we ever have been before, and it is happening at a younger age than we have previously seen. Left unchecked, this exposure could lead to a dramatic shift in the moral values of American youth. When exposure to explicit content becomes normalized, other more socially unacceptable acts become more acceptable. Several scholars and studies have made the connection between rape acceptance and pornography exposure. Pornography is not simply images or videos; it is the breeding place of complacency and acceptance of heinous acts.

Another more controversial item needing censorship from the internet is websites and forums that foster extreme or criminal opinions. The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime published a document that records multiple examples of how the internet has been used to foster terrorism across the globe. One of the main ways these groups use the internet to reach people is through propaganda, including messages, videos or games that intended to sway people to a more extreme mindset.

This topic becomes startling when we realize that none of this is actually prohibited. The UNODC states that “the dissemination of propaganda is generally not, in and of itself, a prohibited activity.” How is this not illegal? Criminal groups are embedding dangerous messages into the internet, and there is nothing the law can do to stop them.

The final commonality on the internet that needs to be regulated is fake news. As internet users, we are practically drowned in a flood of news. I understand that storylines will differ based on the perspective from which they are told, but an issue arises when two stories become irreconcilable. We are correct to assume that a narrative contains multiple storylines, but those lines should not contradict each other.

Somehow, individuals and news outlets manage to transform a single-threaded story into a web of self-contradiction and fallacy. Often, only a select few of those accounts are reasonably factual, leaving the rest as pure fiction, written to incite an emotional response in undiscerning people. It has become increasingly difficult to find cultural common ground with people around us because of the sheer quantity of fallacies we are fed. Humanity requires a standard to be set for news on the internet if groups are to begin to fix bridges and restore broken relationships.

But my viewpoint is uncommon. As a whole, the general American consensus is that freedom of speech should not be infringed. They cry that the First Amendment protects our freedom and keeps the government from influencing our lives. The American Constitution makes it clear that information should be free for all, and that it cannot be restricted by the government.

There is certainly justification in their fears. Governments should not be allowed to abuse their power to subjugate their citizens by scrubbing the internet. Many people fear what may happen to America if internet censorship is allowed. They fear that their freedom of speech will be infringed upon, and they will not be able to express their doubts and concerns to the public. In the opinion of many, internet censorship is the first step down the road leading to the eventual loss of freedom for Americans. Without freedom, innovation and progress will come to a standstill, leading to the undoing of American society.

The discussion regarding internet censorship is just one example of a larger ongoing debate. The core of this issue lies the question of man’s moral compass. If a man is born good, then there is no need to regulate content on the internet or anywhere else. But if man is inherently evil, regulation is imperative. Without guidance, humanity will slowly fall away from moral rightness, and we will begin to suffer the consequences of our arrogance.

The question also remains, who exists that is good enough to regulate us? Certainly not the government. They are human as well and have shown that they fall victim to the same errors as the public. The regulator would have to be a group with objective goals and moral uprightness. I am not sure if such a group exists. But if humanity has proven anything, it is that we are a people sorely in need of regulation if we are to remain on a path to improvement.

Comments are closed.

Contact The Threefold

Join our team, latest articles.

• Liberty University Fined by Department of Education over Campus Safety Issues and Title IX cases
• “The 96th Academy Awards ceremony” kept things entertaining
• “Jesus Did Not Save Me In A Church, He Saved Me In JBU:” Meet Juan Carlos Rodriguez
• Dune: Part Two; The Cinematic Experience We’ve Been Waiting For
• A Statement for Women

Follow us on Twitter

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Social Issues

Essay Samples on Censorship

The power of censorship: safeguarding societal values.

The debate surrounding censorship persuasive is one that evokes strong emotions and diverse opinions. It raises questions about the delicate balance between protecting public morality and preserving the ideals of freedom of expression. While some argue that censorship stifles creativity and limits access to diverse...

The Importance of Censorship: The Vital Balancing Act

The role of censorship in society is a topic that evokes a wide range of opinions, from staunch support to vehement opposition. While the concept of restricting information and expression might seem contrary to the ideals of freedom and openness, a closer examination reveals the...

Navigating the Contours of Music Censorship

Music, an expressive medium that transcends boundaries and cultures, has the power to shape emotions, spark conversations, and challenge societal norms. In the realm of creativity, however, the concept of music censorship introduces a discordant note. The discourse around music censorship echoes the clash between...

Censorship of Art and Artists: The Complex Discourse

The intersection of creativity and expression often finds itself entangled in a contentious debate: the censorship of art and artists. This complex issue has sparked discussions across societies and cultures, raising questions about freedom of speech, cultural preservation, and the power dynamics between creators and...

Unnoted Benefits of Censorship in Media That Protect Us

The topic given to me was to push Media Censorship in the essay. Media Censorship is a form of censorship but specifically in the media. An example of Media censorship is the rating you see on tv like “PG” which means parental guidance. On the...

• Media Influence

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

• 100% unique papers
• 3 hrs deadline option

Fahrenheit 451: Censorship in Ray Bradbury's Novel

Introduction Fahrenheit 451 was written by Ray Bradbury in 1953. In the text, their society wants to burn books to make life simpler and less complicated. In the novel, they burned books using firemen. Bradbury uses an interesting way of showing how twisted their society...

• Fahrenheit 451
• Ray Bradbury

Why Censorship Is Bad for the Perception of Information

Censorship is bad for the community because it is very harmful to people,it can be all over the world and it can cause so much pain in  many different communities in different ways. Following the history of Censorship, writers varying of both age and experience...

Analysis of Western and Japanese Censorship of the Pokemon Anime

In Japanese, the term anime (アニメ) refers to all forms of animation, whereas in the Western world it strictly denotes a “Japanese-style animated film”. The word is the abbreviated pronunciation of “animation” in Japanese. The first anime were produced in Japan at the beginning of...

• Japanese Culture

Arguments for Ensuring the Freedom of Speech in US

Did you know that the happiest country on earth in 2017 was Norway? Did you also know that according to article 100 of The Constitution of Norway, Norwegians are given the right to having freedom in their speech? Denmark, also named to be the happiest...

• Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech Represented by David Irwin

Supreme Court has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. Not speaking, using offensive language to convey political messages, students wearing black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”), contributing money to campaigns,...

A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

One of our rights in the United States is freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, “...prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on...

• First Amendment

The Issue of Language Censorship in the U. S. and Its Impacts

Language significantly influences how people feel and what the world perceives, thus there always has been and always will be attempts made to control it. Unfortunately the people planning to censor language don’t understand that people will not stop using words because they have been...

The History of Censorship in China

Imagine this: a world without Google, Youtube, or Instagram. The horror. Such a scenario would be almost inconceivable to any internet user who regularly relies on search engines to have easy access to endless information, streaming services to procrastinate on work, and social media to...

John Stuart Mill's Stance Against Censorship

The line between being able to punish those who use hate speech and those who exercise their right to free speech is a hard one to define. In this essay, Mill’s, opinion, arguments against him, limitations, and assumptions. Mill states three main arguments and their...

• John Stuart Mill

Ongoing Debate About Benefits of Censorship

Censorship was introduced in the 1800s but was abolished half a century later in 1905. Some forms of censorship were still legal but were finally abrogated on April 27, 1917. But on October 1917 the decrees were lifted and censorship was fully installed back into...

Research Review of Censorship: History and International Overview

The burning of books, cover ups of tragedies, and the muting of other points of view. These actions are frequent, oppressive and yet sometimes necessary. Censorship - the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable,...

• American History

Censorship in India: Striking a Delicate Balance Between Freedom and Regulation

Censorship in India has been a subject of ongoing debate and scrutiny, touching various aspects of society, politics, media, and communication. While some argue that censorship is essential for maintaining social order and national security, others view it as a barrier to freedom of speech...

Censorship In Our Time, Its Forms

You don’t have to go back to communist russia to experience it. You don’t have to be in apartheid South Africa to feel restricted by it. You don’t have to be in north korea to understand how important information is. More importantly, how powerful information...

• Freedom of Expression

Best topics on Censorship

1. The Power of Censorship: Safeguarding Societal Values

2. The Importance of Censorship: The Vital Balancing Act

3. Navigating the Contours of Music Censorship

4. Censorship of Art and Artists: The Complex Discourse

5. Unnoted Benefits of Censorship in Media That Protect Us

6. Fahrenheit 451: Censorship in Ray Bradbury’s Novel

7. Why Censorship Is Bad for the Perception of Information

8. Analysis of Western and Japanese Censorship of the Pokemon Anime

9. Arguments for Ensuring the Freedom of Speech in US

10. Freedom of Speech Represented by David Irwin

11. A Case Study of the American Right to the Freedom of Speech

12. The Issue of Language Censorship in the U. S. and Its Impacts

13. The History of Censorship in China

14. John Stuart Mill’s Stance Against Censorship

15. Ongoing Debate About Benefits of Censorship

• Discrimination
• Globalization
• Pornography
• Gender Equality
• Anti Slavery Movement
• Affirmative Action
• Animal Testing

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society Essay

Introduction, against civil rights, ignorance and misinformation, technically impossible, standardization, works cited.

The Internet is a worldwide electronic library with virtually any kind of information hence it is the greatest and most convenient source of information at the click of a button. Of all the diverse information available in the internet, some explicit information such as pornography, racism, ethnicity, crime and war are considered unethical and against strong virtues of the society.

The negative impacts of internet have raised many concerns over freedom of access and publishing of information, leading to the need to censor internet. Although censoring of internet can help in protecting virtues and culture, it is technically impossible, prohibits propagation of knowledge and against civil rights freedom of speech and press.

Internet censorship is against freedom of expression. The United States government attempted to control internet in 1996 when they passed Communication Decency Act but the Supreme Court made a landmark ruling that it is a violation of the First and Fifth Amendment of the Supreme Court (Valdes Cortes Para. 7).

According to the American Civil Liberties Union, the internet freedom deserves much protection as books, newspapers, magazines and even as a nude statue in a museum (Para. 1). Therefore, it is unconstitutional to censor internet because people have the inalienable rights of freedom of speech and press so long as the civil rights are protected for the interest of justice.

Since internet is the greatest source of knowledge, the censorship of internet denies people access to vital information required in order to acquire knowledge. Insufficient information in the current society will led to misinformation or ignorance that is quite unrealistic (Yee Para 4).

Misinformation and ignorance completely outweigh the negative consequences of the free internet; it is better to have options and choice on the kind of information than be ignorant and misinformed. Modern society is fighting to eliminate ignorance and misinformation that are key democratic aspects of an open society, free of deception and secrecy.

Internet censorship is a way of controlling the minds of people as they say knowledge is power hence, leaders who are in power wants to control and regulate information access by their subjects so that they can continue gain more power while the subjects become more ignorant on pertinent issues that affects their lives (Yee Para 6).

Internet has made it hard for leaders to guard selfishly the knowledge to be within their own reach thus they are making futile attempts to control the flow of information worldwide. Free access of information from the internet have significantly enabled people to gain more and more knowledge making them have informed decisions in the kind of information and challenges they face because ignorance is no longer an excuse of not making the right decision in life..

Internet information is so vast and diverse to the extent that it will be impossible to censor the information in it. Technically, due to the overwhelming data and consequent complex encryption protocols involved, plus other technical factors makes internet censorship impossible (Chapman 132). Internet protocols are designed in such a way to avoid or prevent blocking. Moreover, internet is very dynamic in that censorship will be as futile excise as chasing the wind.

The internet has no boundaries unlike laws and legislations that are specific to a given territory. The Communication Decency Act left many questions unanswered; what is decency and who will determine decency? Diverse cultures in the world have different perceptions of what is ethical or not, what is decent or not, but a censor may have a different perception of what constitutes decent or ethical.

The diversity of cultures and legislations a cross the countries makes it impossible to have a standard internet censorship. According to the Americans Civil Liberties Union, internet censorship need to be put on the hands of the individual so that they can have autonomy to decides on the information they access or publish (Para 2).

Internet censorship is a noble idea of trying to conserve our cultures and traditions, but on contrary, we also need knowledge to eliminate ignorance that seems to perpetuate in this modern society. The positive impacts of free internet access of any information, outweighs by far its negative effects in the society.

Today, a society without access to information seems be in a dark world full of ignorance and misinformation that makes people behave as if they are blind to the current world issues that directly affects them. It is our inalienable right to access and publish information and the freedom of speech and expression are the integral aspect of information.

A democratic and prosperous society is based on the access of the right information used in the making of informed decisions a better society. The freedom to access information must be fought for, otherwise; people in the power will take advantage of our innocence and deny us the right to information that is necessary to rid of the ignorance in the society.

American Civil Liberties Union. “Censorship on Internet.” ACLU. 2010. Web.

Chapman, Gary. “Censorship: Opposing Viewpoints”. 1997. Greenhaven Press . Web.

Valdes Cortes. “ Margarita. Internet Censorship around the World .” University of Chile. 2010. Web.

Yee, Danny. “Internet Censorship: an Australian Press Council Seminar.” Electronic Frontiers Australia . 2010. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, January 18). Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society. https://ivypanda.com/essays/internet-censorship/

"Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society." IvyPanda , 18 Jan. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/internet-censorship/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society'. 18 January.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society." January 18, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/internet-censorship/.

1. IvyPanda . "Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society." January 18, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/internet-censorship/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Need for Internet Censorship and its Impact on Society." January 18, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/internet-censorship/.

• Should Governments Censor Material on the World Wide Web?
• Is It Effective to Censor Parts of the Media?
• Should Censorship Laws Be Applied to the Internet?
• Analysis of “If you assign my book don’t censor it”
• Censorship of Films in the UAE
• Censorship in the United States
• Government Censorship of WikiLeaks
• Art and the Politics of Censorship in Literature
• Pros and Cons of Censorship of Pornography
• Chinese Censorship Block Chinese People from Creativity
• Impact of Modern Technology on Human Communication
• Google Search Engine and Yahoo Search Engine
• The LinkedIn Network and the Problem of Employment
• History of the Internet
• What Are the Causes of the Increased Lack of Internet Privacy?

Censorship through the millennia. And trying to locate it in the 21st Century

Professor of English and Related Literature, University of Oxford

Disclosure statement

Peter D. McDonald receives funding from The Leverhulme Trust and the AHRC, UK.

University of Oxford provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

Once upon a time we all knew what censorship was, who the good and bad guys were, and what could be done to make the world a better place. Look up the noun “censor” in the Oxford English Dictionary and you’ll find an outline of a much-told story under definition 2 (b):

An official in some countries whose duty it is to inspect all books, journals, dramatic pieces, etc, before publication, to secure that they shall contain nothing immoral, heretical, or offensive to the government.

Attributing the first instance of this usage to the English poet John Milton, the lexicographers illustrated it with a quotation from his anti-censorship pamphlet , Areopagitica (1644):

He (the author) … must appear in print like a punie (i.e. a new schoolboy) with his guardian, and his censors hand on the back of his title, to be his bayl and suretye that he is no idiot, or seducer.

Following Milton’s gendered rendering, the story, therefore, went something like this: the censor was the bad guy (Milton’s “temporising and extemporising licencer” with his “cursory eyes”). The writer was the good guy (Milton’s “learned” champion of “free writing and free speaking”). And the plot involved the struggle of the latter against the former not just in his own interests, as a member of the “Republic of Letters”, but in the interests of creating a freer and more grown-up commonwealth for all.

True, the odds were stacked in favour of the all-powerful, infantilising state. Yet no matter how often the struggle played out, the outcome was assured: the seemingly puny champions of freedom and truth would prevail in the end.

There wasn’t much room for us so-called “ordinary readers” in all this. We were either the innocents the paternalistic-repressive state was supposedly trying to protect, or the voiceless fellow citizens on whose behalf the writers were supposedly fighting. But, if we wanted to make the world a better place, it was clear who we needed to support.

Messiness of history

For about three centuries, that is, for the greater part of what we could call the “age of print”, this story had some currency and even some plausibility. I’ll gloss over the messiness of the actual history that all too often throws up inconvenient facts. It reveals in some cases, for example, censors who were not cursory or paranoid state bureaucrats but “learned men” in Milton’s sense who believed they were making the world a better place.

And the canonical story hardly dated overnight. Even in the early years of the digital revolution, it looked like it had plenty of time to run.

Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

So wrote John Perry Barlow, former lyricist for the American rock band, Grateful Dead , in the opening of his 1996 “Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace”, an Aeropagitica for the digital age.

Barlow wasn’t being quixotic. Far from showing any signs of weariness, the old state giants were already gearing up to make the most of the opportunities the new technologies afforded for extending their sovereignty, whether repressively (think of China), defensively (think of the UK) or aggressively (think of Russia).

The complication was that the emerging tech giants of the post-industrial world were themselves poised to become the new disrupters in ways Barlow did not anticipate.

Over the course of the next decade the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter — the “private superpowers” as historian and commentator Timothy Garton Ash dubs them — turned Barlow’s brave new cyber world into a vast profit-making machine effectively run on surveillance algorithms. At the same time they created the conditions for other actors, whether of the state (think of Donald Trump), allied to it (think of India’s social media vigilantes), or outside it (think of the worldwide population of trolls), to wield new forms of “temporising and extemporising” power.

Sometimes adding the threat of violence to the mix, these new enemies of free expression act like a novel breed of self-appointed censor, deforming, infantilising or closing down public debate at every opportunity.

Freedom to hold opinions

Opening the digital Pandora’s Box may have spelt the end of the old story but well before the 1990s developments in international law had already introduced other complications:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

In the aftermath of World War II and amid the gathering shadows of the Cold War, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) represented a major turning point in the long story. It marked the moment the battle-scarred “giants of flesh and steel” collectively agreed if not to curb their powers, then at least to affirm the freedom of expression as a shared ideal.

Only six years later, however, another key UN instrument, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (drafted 1954, signed 1966), added some significant qualifications. The first was under its own Article 19(3) which covers the “rights and reputations of others” as well as “national security”, “public order” and “public health or morals”. Then in Article 20 it prohibited “propaganda for war” and “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence”.

As the Oxford English Dictionary notes , the phrase “hate speech”, the origins of which it traces to a report about Hitler in the New York Syracuse Herald for 29 September 1938, now encompasses

hatred or intolerance, esp towards a particular social group on the basis of ethnicity, religious beliefs, sexuality, etc.

At the same time Article 15(3) of the companion Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights embellished the Universal Declaration. It specifically required states,

to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.

Taken together, these legal, cultural and technological developments made the canonical story look less and less tenable in the new millennium. They have also reopened the most basic questions once again: What is censorship? If thinking in simple binaries still makes any sense, then who is on the side of the good and who the bad? And what can we ordinary citizen-netizens do to make the world a better place?

• Oxford English Dictionary

Events Officer

Lecturer (Hindi-Urdu)

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

The Edvocate

• Lynch Educational Consulting
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• Write For Us
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Assistive Technology
• Best PreK-12 Schools in America
• Child Development
• Classroom Management
• Early Childhood
• EdTech & Innovation
• Education Leadership
• First Year Teachers
• Gifted and Talented Education
• Special Education
• Parental Involvement
• Policy & Reform
• Best Colleges and Universities
• Best College and University Programs
• HBCU’s
• Higher Education EdTech
• Higher Education
• International Education
• The Awards Process
• Finalists and Winners of The 2022 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2021 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2020 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2019 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2018 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2017 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Award Seals
• GPA Calculator for College
• GPA Calculator for High School
• Cumulative GPA Calculator
• Grade Calculator
• Weighted Grade Calculator
• Final Grade Calculator
• The Tech Edvocate
• AI Powered Personal Tutor

College Minor: Everything You Need to Know

14 fascinating teacher interview questions for principals, tips for success if you have a master’s degree and can’t find a job, 14 ways young teachers can get that professional look, which teacher supplies are worth the splurge, 8 business books every teacher should read, conditional admission: everything you need to know, college majors: everything you need to know, 7 things principals can do to make a teacher observation valuable, 3 easy teacher outfits to tackle parent-teacher conferences, censorship essay topics.

Censorship Research Questions

• Empirical Likelihood Semiparametric Regression Analysis Constrained by Random Censorship
• An Argument Against Internet Censorship in America
• Radio Censorship and Lack of Freedom in the United States of America
• Censorship as the Control of What People May Hear or Say, Read or Write, Do or See
• An Analysis and Overview of Explicit Lyrics and Censorship in the United States of America
• Censorship and the First Amendment in the United States
• Censorship and the Media: Advertiser Influence on the Media
• Censorship on the Internet and Freedom of Speech
• Censorship Needed for Proper Education of Guardian
• An Argument for Television Censorship Based on Content, Time Slot, and Audience
• Censorship of Music and the Impact of Listening to Music with Violent and Objectionable Lyrics
• Internet Censorship: An Examination of a Controversial Issue
• Consistent Estimation Under Random Censorship In the Presence of Co-variables
• Music Censorship Is a Constitutional and Human Rights Violation
• The Government Should Not Impose Censorship

Easy Censorship Essay Topics

• Censorship of the Internet and Its Role in Protecting Our Society’s Adolescent
• Against Internet Censorship, Including Pornography
• The Concept of Censorship on College Campuses Regarding Sexism and Racism
• Government Cyber-Frontier and Internet Censorship
• Censorship Issues in the United States: Innovative Solutions
• Asymptotically Efficient Estimation Using Semi-Parametric Random Censorship Models
• Censorship Regimes: Tactics in China and Russia
• Censorship Principles: An Overview of Right and Wrong
• An Argument Against School-Based Literature Censorship Due to Racism in Literary Works
• Censorship in the United States: Its History, Positive and Negative Impacts
• Censorship and Burlesque Show Analysis

Controversial Censorship Topics to Write About

• The Importance of Internet Free Speech and Censorship
• The Libertarian Party’s History and Its Positions on the Role of Government, Censorship, and Gun Control
• Communications Decency Act and the Internet Censorship
• Monitoring Children’s Surfing Habits Is a Better Option for Censoring the Internet
• The History of Censorship in Modern and Ancient Civilizations
• Censorship, Supervision, and Control of Ideas and Information
• The Three Basic Social Institutions and the Importance of Television Censorship
• An Argument for the Use of Censorship in Order to Preserve Morals and Decency
• Is Internet Censorship and De-Anonymization a Threat to Our Liberty?
• Parental Control or Censorship?

Research Questions about Censorship

• What Do Raleigh’s Letter Home and the Censorship Problem Tell You About Raleigh?
• Can Censorship Limit Your Freedom?
• How Darwin Shaped Our Understanding of the Importance of Language?
• Censorship: How Does It Affect the Relationship with His Wife?
• How and Why Does Censorship Lead to Lack of Knowledge in Young People?
• What Is the Effect of Censorship on Kids?
• Media Censorship: How Does It Violate Freedom of Expression and Affect Businesses?
• Responsibility and Censorship: Which Is the Lesser of Two?
• How Can Censorship Prevent Progress?
• How Is Music Censorship Related to the Individual?
• How Does the Media Pretend to Protect Us Using Censorship?
• What Is the Effect of Censorship on Our Daily Lives?
• Is There An Internet Censorship Against Human Rights in China?
• Movies Censorship: Can Ratings for Censored Movies Be Socially Justified?
• Public Libraries and Censorship: Should Public Libraries Filter Internet Sites?
• Does Parental Censorship Increase Children’s Curiosity?
• What Are the Arguments for and Against Pornography Censorship?
• How Were Propaganda and Censorship Used in the United Kingdom and Germany During WWI?
• Should China’s Government Ban internet censorship?
• In 1928, How Did Virginia Woolf’s Orlando Subvert Censorship and Revolutionize the Politics of LGBT Love?
• Cooptation, Censorship, Propaganda, and Repression: How Do Modern Dictators Survive?

Censorship Topics for Research Paper

• What Were the Arguments For and Against Censorship in Video Nasties?
• How Does Media Censorship Affect Business Freedom of Expression and Impact Businesses?
• Why Does News Ownership Affect Press Freedom and Censorship?
• Should Censorship Interviews Chain Music?
• Why Should Graffiti Be Accepted as a Form of Art?
• What Is the Relationship Between Censorship and Book Bans?
• How Does the Congress Define Censorship and Censor?
• How Does Censorship Affect Animation Development?
• Why Should They Allow Internet Censorship?

20 Ways to Support Students Who Throw ...

Stereotype threat: everything you need to know.

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author, simple & easy literacy development essay topics, essay topics on downsizing, civil rights movement essay topics, biodiversity essay topics, fascinating animal welfare essay topics, research questions about money.

Censorship Essay

The pros and cons of censorship.

Over the years, there has been an ongoing debate about whether or not censorship is an acceptable government practice. The issue at times, has become so controversial that it has literally divided the nation into several different groups. Those who are for it base their arguments on the belief that with censorship there is balance and a clear understanding of proper language both written and spoken while those who are opposed claim that if permitted, the people lose their freedom of speech.

Regardless of what side of the issue you may fall on, censorship hits to the very heart of humanity. It attempts to control the very thing that separates us from all of the creations on earth. The ability to communicate at a level that goes deeper than any other form of communication is at the heart of every television program we watch, every play or movie we see, and even every book or magazine we pick up to read.

Still, many people do not fully understand what censorship actually means. They often conclude that it is a means of those in authority attempting to curtail the people’s freedom of expression, however the issue goes much deeper than that.

The Moral Code

Get high quality custom written essay just for $10

Benefits of Censorship

It is also censorship that keeps people from plagiarizing another person’s work or from revealing private details and information about other people. In these cases, the information that secures your credit and private matters can remain relatively secure. It also keeps people from slandering or even libeling people who think and believe different from someone else. Therefore, some people may choose to dislike one person for whatever reason but because of censorship they are not permitted to spread lies about someone who may be different from them. (1)

This protects various cultures from racism, feminism, or any other form of discrimination. And it protects the public by preventing them from making any sort of claim on their products that may not be entirely true.

In fact, some benefits of censorship we don’t readily see because it is not at the very forefront of everything they need to know. It is often hidden, and at times pointed out as sinister in its purpose. (2)

The Ugly Side of Censorship

While there are definitely some benefits to censorship, it does have its own drawbacks and flaws. No decision is perfect but when censorship is applied with the wrong motives, it can have a very negative effect on everyone involved. For example, when there is a definite compromise to the freedom of the press and speech, it may intrude on all areas of creativity and in the wrong hands it can easily be misused.

The bottom line is that censorship can cut two ways. While many of us are quick to cry out that censorship is not appropriate in a progressive society, few will realize that every day, part of who they have become and their course in life has been the direct result of censorship. So, while you may be thinking about all of the things there are that censorship can put limits on, it pays for all of us to learn and realize how we have benefited over the years by having this very controversial issue in place.

References: http://www.buzzle.com/articles/pros-and-cons-of-censorship.html http://futureofworking.com/11-biggest-pros-and-cons-of-censorship/

Related Samples :

• Nursing Essay Sample
• Freedom of Speech Essay
• Foreign Policy Essay
• Industrial Revolution Essay
• English Language Arts Essay
• Fall of Rome Essay

Rely on professional writers with your college paper and take a load off your mind. Relax while we are working on your essay. Your peace of mind is just one click away

Internet Censorship: Definition, Types, and How It Can Affect You

DataProt is supported by its audience. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn a commission. This, however, does not influence the evaluations in our reviews. Learn More .

Affiliate Disclosure

DataProt is an independent review site dedicated to providing accurate information about various cybersecurity products.

DataProt remains financially sustainable by participating in a series of affiliate partnerships - it is visitors’ clicks on links that cover the expenses of running this site. Our website also includes reviews of products or services for which we do not receive monetary compensation.

DataProt's in-house writing team writes all the site’s content after in-depth research, and advertisers have no control over the personal opinions expressed by team members, whose job is to stay faithful to the truth and remain objective.

Some pages may include user-generated content in the comment section. The opinions expressed in the comment section do not reflect those of DataProt.

Internet censorship is a big deal. The days of complete cyber freedom are all but gone, with  companies and governments interfering with the web. Their involvement is ruining the cyberworld for the rest of us in various ways, with censorship being the most prominent.

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed online. It happens when governments, organizations, or individuals restrict or block access to web content. In this article, we’ll be explaining how censorship happens, its impact on the internet, and how to avoid it. 

What Is Internet Censorship and How It Happens

Some countries censor the internet because they don’t want their citizens to see things that might upset them or make them think differently. They also might do this to keep people from organizing protests or speaking out against the government.

Their goal, usually, is to make it difficult to get accurate information about what’s going on in the world or stop people from being able to share their opinions freely.

But, the government internet censorship can happen for a variety of other reasons , including political, religious, or moral grounds and restricting media freedom. 

While government-level censorship is meant to shut down dissidents, there are other reasons why organizations and groups of people restrict internet access to others. An organization may block certain websites to protect its members from offensive or inappropriate content or simply to increase productivity by limiting access to entertainment and social media sites.

Censorship of the internet happens in one of two directions:

• Top-down censorship is when a government or organization tells service providers what content to block. In some cases, laws may require certain content to be censored. Users have no say in this and can’t choose what to access. 
• Self-imposed censorship is associated with individuals or groups self-censoring by choosing what content to avoid. For example, someone may decide not to view certain websites because they know their government will censor the information, making it inaccurate. 

Different Types of Web Censorship

Different things can be censored, like specific pictures, words, or whole websites and internet protocols. There are also different ways to censor things – blocking either full access to the material or limiting searches for censored terms.

Government-level Censorship

One type of censorship is when a government makes it illegal to say certain things . For instance, in China, the government has made it illegal to talk about certain topics online, like democracy or human rights. They do this by censoring websites that discuss these topics and punishing people who break the rules. Governments work with ISPs to put those restrictions into motion, either by outright blocking access to websites or redirecting traffic to similar, regulated sites.

Platform Restrictions

Another type of censorship is when social media companies block certain content from their platforms . For example, Facebook has been criticized for censoring body positivity and sex education posts. Likewise, YouTube has been accused of censoring videos about LGBTQ+ rights, mental health, and COVID-19 awareness. In this case, platforms issue take-down notices, followed by the removal of said content.

It’s not uncommon for governments to even force tech companies to impose content restrictions based on their own propaganda. In such a case, the government would strong-arm content hosts into submission by threatening outright bans of their platforms. As a counterpoint, Twitter has started clearly marking government-related profiles, so users can see at a glance whether the profile could be a part of a propaganda machine. It’s not much, but at least it helps fight the censorship on the internet.

Local Restrictions

Lastly, censorship can happen on a smaller scale within a single institution. For example, a school may restrict access to certain parts of the internet or even key phrases. That way, the students cannot use the school’s computers to visit inappropriate websites like adult websites or social networks.

Similarly, employers may put blocks on specific apps, services, and websites, so the employees can only access the software and websites they allow them to. While we’ll be discussing how to avoid content blocks and censorship using free VPNs and similar tactics, we strongly advise caution in such situations.

How Censorship Works in Different Countries

Some countries have rigid censorship laws, while others have none at all. China is well-known for its internet restrictions, which some call the “great firewall of China.” The Chinese government blocks access to many websites and social media platforms, like Facebook and Twitter. Google’s search engine, as well as all other Google products, is also banned in China. The government is censoring search results and blocks certain words from being used online.

In Saudi Arabia, the government filters content based on religious and moral values. It usually blocks websites that contain pornography or material that could be considered offensive to Islam. In Iran, the government blocks websites that are critical of the regime or that contain information that could be used to foment dissent.

In Russia, a new law requires internet service providers to censor websites that the government decides are “extremist.” This can include foreign websites that have critical opinions of the government in question or that provide information about protests or other forms of defiance.

Censorship can also happen in less obvious ways. For example, many countries require internet companies to collect data about their users’ activities. This data can be used to track people and see what they’re doing online. Needless to say that such laws disrupt net neutrality.

Impact of Censorship

Increased censorship can have a number of negative effects. For starters, it limits people’s ability to access information and ideas. This can lead to a loss of knowledge and opportunities for education and personal growth. 

Additionally, digital censorship can stifle creativity and critical thinking . Having no access to the online world can restrain people’s ability to freely express themselves. When people are only exposed to one side of an issue, it can be challenging to develop a well-rounded opinion. Seeing only one aspect of the whole picture can also lead to misinformation.

Censorship can create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust. People may grow afraid of expressing their opinions or sharing their ideas, which can lead to a feeling of isolation and disconnection.

Why Is Internet Freedom Important

Since the early days of the internet, people have been fighting for online freedom. The internet has become an essential part of our lives, so much so that internet access has been declared a basic human right by the UN Resolution in 2016. Censoring the internet denies us that basic right.

Access to the internet means access to information, education, and communication. It allows us to connect with friends and family and participate in the global community. It is essential for businesses and for the economy, which the pandemic years especially confirmed to be true. When regulations on the type of content we can access are imposed, serious issues may arise, such as when restrictions infringe on medical websites that people need. 

Cyberspace is also a powerful tool for democracy and human rights. The UN recognized the importance of the internet in a Resolution passed in 2016, declaring it a basic human right. The general belief is that the internet is something all people should have access to. Restricting access to parts of the internet is threading on human rights, rights to community, learning, and prospering in this modern world.

How to Circumvent Censorship

If you live in a country with restricted internet, there are several ways to bypass the restrictions and gain access to all internet content.

Web proxies are the simplest, fastest way to get around censorship and regional restrictions on the internet. They work by routing your traffic through a different server so that the website you are trying to visit doesn’t know your true IP address. This can be used to get around simple content filters, like the ones your school or workplace may have in place.

Web proxies are not perfect, however. They can be slow, and they don’t always work with every website. Additionally, your traffic is still going through another server, which means that the proxy owner could be snooping on your traffic and detecting phony IP addresses. More important – your internet service provider and, thus, the government, can still know what you were browsing.

Another way to get access to censored websites is to use a virtual private network. VPNs create a private, secure connection between two devices, which can be used to access restricted websites. When you use a VPN that doesn’t log data, your traffic is encrypted, so your ISP or anyone else can’t see what you’re doing online. Even more important, there’s no data saved on the provider’s side as if you’ve never used the service at all. 

While VPNs are legal in most parts of the world, some countries block them and can even issue a fine if you get caught. If you’re using a VPN in a country where they are not allowed or just worried about the repercussions, you may need to use a different method to access restricted websites.

Tor Browser

Lastly, you might only need to switch your internet browser to a more secure one. Tor is a free browser that allows you to surf the internet anonymously. By encrypting traffic and bouncing it through a distributed network of relays, Tor makes it difficult for anyone to track a user’s online activity.

The main downside to using Tor is that it can be slow. Because traffic is routed through multiple relays, each with its own bandwidth limitations, Tor users may experience slowdowns when browsing the web. Additionally, some websites may block traffic from known Tor relays, making them inaccessible to Tor users.

Final Thoughts

Internet censorship, as explained, can be a difficult issue to navigate. On the one hand, it’s important to protect people from offensive or harmful material. On the other hand, it is important to allow people to freely access information and express themselves. 

Lastly, as the internet is now considered a basic human right, imposing restrictions of such kind is a sign of dictatorship and not a signal that the government actually cares about pressing issues.

Further reading

The Onion Theory of Data Security Layers

What Is the Dark Web? Myths and Facts About the Hidden Internet

Leave a comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Student Advocates for Speech

Home » Projects » Student Advocates for Speech

EMPOWERING THE NEXT GENERATION OF ADVOCATES

NCAC’s Student Advocates for Speech Leadership Program is the only one of its kind which focuses on creating high school-level student advocates who can speak about the direct impact that book bannings and other forms of educational censorship have on their ability to learn and engage in free inquiry and critical thinking.

The SAS Leadership Program will create a network of student leaders in key target states who will become front line advocates to address free speech challenges happening in their communities. SAS Leaders will learn about current free speech challenges and NCAC will provide personalized advocacy skills and training to enable high schoolers to become leaders in the efforts to protect free speech and open expression in their communities.

The SAS program builds off of NCAC’s expertise and resources – and contributes unique added value to a field by engaging and providing resources to the next generation of advocates for free speech.

The SAS program will also benefit from opportunities to partner and advocate with another NCAC program: the Kids’ Right to Read Network (KRRN). KRRN is a national grassroots network of local community organizers who advocate at school board meetings and in the local community to support and defend books. They speak at school board meetings, public library boards and are also organizing book drives to get banned books out into the community to raise awareness. Involving students in their efforts enables the KRRN to work with directly affected students and enables young people to play a critical role in their community.

Please visit the Student Advocates for Speech FAQ to learn more about our program.

SAS provides the next generation of leaders with tools to hone and promote the essential principles of free expression and to be lifelong advocates for free speech as both a fundamental human right and a keystone of democracy.

Watch our leaders in action .

The goals of SAS are to help students fight for their own free speech rights as well as the rights of others, including those they disagree with; and amplifying the voices of young people in democratic civic life.

Learn more about the SAS program .

NCAC will provide free speech education, advocacy training, guidance on activism to defend banned books, and opportunities for leadership on issues including student free press freedom and policy advocacy. Meet the Trainers .

SAS Leaders will meet monthly to discuss and learn how to promote the essential principles of free expression as they relate to contemporary issues.

UPCOMING EVENTS

Past events.

Defending Student Press Freedom

February 25 5pm ET / 4pm CT

A Conversation with High School Students to celebrate Student Free Press Day 2024

This virtual event features student leaders from NCAC’s Student Advocates for Speech and Student Press Law Center’s New Voices programs! Join students for a conversation about the value of student journalists and their role in shaping civic culture in their schools and communities in an election year.

Participation is free for all high school students. Registration is required.

Topic : How a Banned Book Changed My Life

Winners Announced

The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) and The Society of Children’s Book Writers and Illustrators (SCBWI) Impact and Legacy Fund have co-sponsored an essay contest for high school students!

A panel of judges selected Neve Bonura-Learnard (Newbury, Ma.) and Harsidak Singh (Arlington, Va.) who received a $250 credit for Kindle or Apple Books and read their essays during the 2023 SCBWI Impact and Legacy Fund Children’s Book Changemakers virtual conference on June, 8 2023. Winners also interviewed (and were interviewed by) Ellen Hopkins, acclaimed banned author of “Crank.” Honorable Mention was awarded to Mariama Cisse (Dunwoody, GA) who received a $100 credit for Kindle or Apple Books.

STUDENT TESTIMONIALS

The best part of the program so far this year was crafting our review of a banned book that impacts us. Being able to discuss and learn from successful and insightful authors was immensely beneficial and I really enjoyed being able to hear their takes. It was fun to make something about a book I really cared about.

I’ve enjoyed being able to form connections within the national side of the program…Using the skills and tools from NCAC, I have been able to further defend free speech in my county.

I think my favorite part was actually during the summer when we had just begun delving into various free speech cases.

There’s so many things I can do with SAS that I didn’t have before. A supportive backing is amazing.

MEDIA COVERAGE

Friends of sas.

Student Advocates for Speech is administered by the National Coalition Against Censorship’s Youth Free Expression Program. Please contact NCAC’s Youth Free Expression Coordinator Gianmarco Antosca at [email protected] .

Your donation will help us foster the next generation of advocates.  Each dollar equals endless opportunities for our nation’s youth. Please contact NCAC’s Development Director  Josh Corday  [email protected] to  learn how you can lend your support.

Advertisement

Trump Denies Elections and Praises Rioters, but R.F.K. Jr. Says It’s Biden Who Threatens Democracy

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who founded his political career on conspiracy theories, condemned efforts to curtail misinformation on social media and said the Biden administration’s efforts to do so are anti-democratic.

• Share full article

By Maggie Astor and Rebecca Davis O’Brien

• Published April 2, 2024 Updated April 3, 2024, 9:06 a.m. ET

Former President Donald J. Trump has refused to accept his loss in the 2020 election, painted as martyrs the supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, laid groundwork to deny the 2024 election results if he loses, and said he would be a dictator on his first day back in office if he wins.

But according to the independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., it is President Biden who poses the greater threat to American democracy — a view that Mr. Kennedy shares with Mr. Trump himself, and that democracy experts called “absurd” and “preposterous.”

Such a perspective is possible because Mr. Kennedy, who has founded his political career on promoting vaccine misinformation and conspiracy theories about the government, sees the Biden administration’s efforts to curtail the spread of misinformation as a seminal issue of our time. Censorship, as he calls it, overpowers all other concerns about the political system.

Mr. Kennedy’s stance drew fresh scrutiny this week after he said in an interview on CNN , “Listen, I can make the argument that President Biden is a much worse threat to democracy, and the reason for that is President Biden is the first candidate in history, the first president in history that has used the federal agencies to censor political speech, to censor his opponent.” He repeated himself on Fox News on Tuesday, saying that a president like Mr. Biden was “a genuine threat to our democracy.”

The remarks by Mr. Kennedy, who carries the name but not the support of a storied Democratic family, were an escalation of his attacks on Mr. Biden and the Democratic Party — and he quickly backtracked, saying in an interview with Chris Cuomo on NewsNation on Tuesday night that he had been misunderstood. “What I said was that I could make this argument. I didn’t say definitively whether I believed one or the other was more dangerous to democracy. I did say that I don’t believe either of them are going to destroy democracy.”

Mr. Kennedy has long said that the government’s engagement with media companies and tech platforms — to prevent the spread of disinformation or illegal materials or, in Mr. Kennedy’s case, the arguments he and his allies made against vaccines — amounts to illegal censorship, an argument that was met with skepticism at the Supreme Court last month.

In the CNN and Fox News interviews, Mr. Kennedy — an environmental lawyer who until last fall was himself a Democrat — trained his outrage directly on the Democratic Party’s leader, whose allies worry that Mr. Kennedy could tip a close election in November to Mr. Trump.

Democratic officials have devoted increasing resources to a multipronged effort to undermine Mr. Kennedy’s campaign, fearing that his presence on swing-state ballots could siphon votes from Mr. Biden.

At the same time, it remains unclear whether Mr. Kennedy — whose anti-establishment message has also made him popular with some disaffected Republicans, independents and Libertarians — would draw more votes from Mr. Biden than from Mr. Trump. A recent Fox News poll showed him drawing about equally from both candidates, and Mr. Trump attacked Mr. Kennedy last week as a “radical Left” candidate, in a potential sign of nervousness about his candidacy.

In campaign appearances, Mr. Kennedy has often drawn comparisons between Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump. Last week, when he announced his running mate, Nicole Shanahan , a Silicon Valley lawyer, Mr. Kennedy said that to young Americans, Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump “look like two sides of the same coin.”

But several scholars who have studied democratic governments and the ways they can backslide told The New York Times that it was nonsensical to suggest that social media moderation — which the Supreme Court seemed inclined to uphold as a legitimate goal of government — posed a greater threat than what Mr. Trump has done.

They pointed to his refusal to accept an election loss, his stoking of political violence, and his efforts to consolidate executive power and undermine public confidence in independent sources of information.

The two most fundamental tenets of democracy are that politicians “must always unambiguously accept the results of elections and must always unambiguously reject political violence,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard who co-wrote the book “How Democracies Die.” “I don’t think you’ll find a democracy expert in the world who will claim that the mild efforts to regulate social media in the United States are somehow equivalent or worse than an effort to overturn an election or the encouragement of political violence.”

Sheri Berman, a professor of political science at Barnard College, said Mr. Kennedy had not only downplayed Mr. Trump’s election denial — a threat that is “fundamental” and “has to be recognized as such if democracy is going to work,” she said — but also inflated Mr. Biden’s actions.

“If we had a president who was using federal agencies to chase down his opponents, to disadvantage them politically, to stop them from being able to speak to citizens and voters, that would be a major infringement of democratic norms,” Dr. Berman said. “That’s not what Biden was doing.”

In the CNN interview, Mr. Kennedy said Mr. Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election “clearly” was a threat, but added: “The greatest threat to democracy is not somebody who questions election returns, but a president of the United States who uses the power of his office to force a social media company — Facebook, Instagram, Twitter — to open a portal and give access to that portal to the F.B.I., the C.I.A., the I.R.S., the CISA, the N.I.H., to censor his political critics.”

He then said he was not making the argument he had just made, but was simply saying it was an argument he could make.

He also did not provide evidence of any “portal” through which federal agencies can remove posts. Rather, he referred to a lawsuit he filed last year alleging that, by threatening regulatory action, the Biden administration had “induced” social media companies to restrict speech — including anti-vaccine misinformation — in ways the First Amendment would prohibit the government from doing directly.

A federal judge in February granted a preliminary injunction but stayed it until the Supreme Court rules in a related case, Murthy v. Missouri, with which Mr. Kennedy’s case was consolidated. In the meantime, the Supreme Court allowed the government, including the F.B.I., to continue contact with major social media companies — and in hearing the case last month, the justices appeared skeptical of the arguments against the government.

A lawyer for the government, Brian H. Fletcher, told the court that banning the regulation in question would itself prohibit speech, including public comments from a press secretary or other officials seeking to discourage posts that are harmful to children, antisemitic or Islamophobic. He added that the social media companies had acted independently of the government and often rejected requests to take down postings.

A senior adviser for the Democratic National Committee called Mr. Kennedy’s comments “MAGA talking points” that put to rest “any doubts that he’s a spoiler candidate.”

“With a straight face, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that Joe Biden is a bigger threat to democracy than Donald Trump because he was barred from pushing conspiracy theories online,” the adviser, Mary Beth Cahill, said. “There is no comparison to summoning a mob to the Capitol and promising to be a dictator on Day 1.”

In the CNN interview, Mr. Kennedy also said falsely that Mr. Biden was “the first president in history to use his power over the Secret Service to deny Secret Service protection to one of his political opponents for political reasons,” referring to the government’s refusal so far to extend protection to Mr. Kennedy.

“Major” presidential candidates are eligible for Secret Service protection but are not guaranteed it. Whether to grant protection is up to the secretary of homeland security, in consultation with congressional leaders from both major parties, and independent and third-party candidates are less likely than Democrats and Republicans to receive it.

In a fund-raising email on Tuesday morning, Mr. Kennedy’s campaign reiterated its complaints about the Biden administration and the Democratic Party, describing the party as corrupt and attacking its escalating legal efforts to challenge his ballot access and its refusal to allow a debate between Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Biden.

“The Democrat political machine is pulling out every trick in the book to stop our huge momentum,” the email said. “With endless resources, establishment Democrats want to stop a debate between Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Biden. They are using a vast network of shadowy dark money groups and vicious attorneys to keep Kennedy-Shanahan ticket off state ballots and spread malicious smears.”

Dr. Levitsky and Dr. Berman both noted that it was rare, in a democratic country, for a politician to explicitly reject democratic norms. It is more common for them to try to create a cloud of doubt so voters struggle to know what is true.

“Those who engage in misinformation about democracy, those who muddy the waters about what is and isn’t democratic, are complicit in the assault on our democracy,” Dr. Levitsky said. “The kind of behavior that sustains a democracy hasn’t changed over time.”

Maggie Astor covers politics for The New York Times, focusing on breaking news, policies, campaigns and how underrepresented or marginalized groups are affected by political systems. More about Maggie Astor

Rebecca Davis O’Brien covers campaign finance and money in U.S. elections. She previously covered federal law enforcement, courts and criminal justice. More about Rebecca Davis O’Brien

Our Coverage of the 2024 Presidential Election

News and Analysis

While President Biden and Donald Trump scored overwhelming victories  in primaries in New York, Wisconsin, Rhode Island and Connecticut on April 2, small but significant protest votes in both parties have persisted .

Trump again cast Biden’s immigration record in violent and ominous terms , accusing him of creating a “border blood bath” and once more using dehumanizing language to describe some migrants entering the country illegally.

Biden called a decision by the Florida Supreme Court to uphold a restrictive abortion law “outrageous” and “extreme,”  while Trump demurred  on taking a clear position.

Biden’s alternatively cozy and combative relationship  with America’s business leaders has rippled through the national economy, federal policy and now the 2024 election.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called Biden a bigger threat to democracy than Trump , who has denied his 2020 election loss and praised Jan. 6 rioters. After Kennedy’s stance drew scrutiny, he quickly backtracked.

Trump, who ends many of his rallies with a churchlike ritual, has infused his movement with Christianity .

Covert Chinese accounts are masquerading online as American supporters of Trump , signaling a potential shift in how Beijing aims to influence U.S. politics.

Jack Smith Wants to Censor Donald Trump Documents

Prosecutors have asked a judge for "extensive" censorship of court papers in Donald Trump 's classified documents case.

Special Counsel Jack Smith wrote in a court brief to Judge Aileen Cannon that he wants to redact several papers and also remove the name and pronouns of government officials to protect their safety.

His censorship request is opposed by Trump and his two co-accused.

The former president is facing 40 federal charges over his handling of sensitive materials retrieved from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, after leaving the White House in January 2021. He is accused of obstructing efforts by federal authorities to return them. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Newsweek contacted Trump's attorney via email for comment on Tuesday.

Two former Trump employees, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira , are accused of moving boxes of sensitive materials around Trump's Florida home to prevent federal agents from finding them and conspiring to delete security footage that had been sought under a subpoena.

Nauta and De Oliveira have pleaded not guilty to all federal charges against them, including conspiracy to obstruct justice. Newsweek contacted Nauta and De Oliveira 's lawyers for comment via email on Tuesday.

In his latest filing, Smith says that "witness safety and privacy are paramount pre-trial."

He complained in previous filings that witnesses and court staff in other Trump cases have been intimidated and he doesn't want a repeat of that in Trump's classified documents case.

Smith also notes that Nauta's lawyers quote from documents that have been sealed by a judge and which the public should not be allowed to read.

Smith has already sent a proposed censored version of the documents to Cannon and to the defense lawyers in the case.

Much of the censorship is of reply briefs submitted by Trump's co-accused, Nauta.

Those briefs are in support of Nauta's motion to dismiss the case, based on a claim of selective and vindictive prosecution and he and Trump's motion to suppress evidence.

Trump, Nauta and De Oliveira all opposed Smith's attempts to censor the documents.

"The government has conferred with counsel for all three defendants concerning this motion, and they maintain that the government has not met its burden to support restricting public access to the two reply briefs," Smith's latest court briefing states.

"There are three portions of Nauta's selective/vindictive reply that require extensive redactions. First, beginning on page two of the reply and continuing through page four, Nauta references, summarizes, and quotes from filings that this court has ordered sealed. The Government does not object to the court unsealing these docket entries, but until it does so, these portions of the reply must be redacted," Smith states.

Smith also alleges that Nauta's lawyers are quoting from sealed grand jury evidence.

"Second, on pages four and five of the reply, Nauta references a sealed grand jury proceeding in the District of Columbia that occurred as part of this investigation and that involved another client of his counsel."

Smith also claims that Nauta's lawyers reference another grand jury case in which the lawyer was involved and, of which, Smith and his team have no knowledge.

"Last, page seven of the reply contains the names of potential government witnesses. The government seeks to redact their names. As the government has argued in its prior motions for redactions and/or sealing, witness safety and privacy are paramount pre- trial," Smith states.

"Throughout Nauta's motion to suppress reply, he includes the names of Government witnesses. The government is seeking to redact their names and any pronouns revealing their gender," Smith adds.

He is joined in his filing by two lawyers in his office, Jay I. Bratt and David V. Harbach II.

Related Articles

• Aileen Cannon Removal Calls Grow Over Latest Filing
• Testimony of Donald Trump's Valet May Be Released by Florida Court
• Judge Cannon's Two Scenarios 'Direct Jury To Find Trump Not Guilty'—Lawyer
• Aileen Cannon's 'Insane' Donald Trump Filing Trashed by Legal Experts
• Jack Smith Could Be Prevented From Using Evidence by Aileen Cannon

Start your unlimited Newsweek trial

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Censorship — The Importance of Censorship in Today’s World

Advantages and Disadvantages of Censorship in Today’s World

• Categories: Censorship Freedom of Expression Modern Society

About this sample

Words: 2738 |

14 min read

Published: Nov 26, 2019

Words: 2738 | Pages: 6 | 14 min read

Works Cited

• Mette, N. (n.d.). The History of Censorship. Ancient History Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.ancient.eu/article/1015/the-history-of-censorship/
• Palfrey, J. (2016). A Short History of Internet Regulation. In A. Sokolova, J. Kulesza, R. Maguire, & F. Dignum (Eds.), Social Informatics (pp. 15-26). Springer International Publishing.
• Mackinnon, R. (2012). The Dictator’s Dilemma: The Internet, Dictatorships, and the Prospects for Democratization. Journal of Democracy, 23(2), 63-76.
• OpenNet Initiative. (n.d.). Internet Censorship and Surveillance by Country. Retrieved from https://opennet.net/research/
• Karnadi, E. B. (2019). Censorship, Crime, and Corruption: An Empirical Study of Internet Regulation and Crime Rate in Asia. In P. Bui & H. L. Yang (Eds.), Governance and Sustainability in Asia (pp. 41-61). Springer.
• Chang, E. C., & Chu, Y.-H. (2011). Internet Censorship and Regulation Systems in Democracies: Comparative Analysis of South Korea and Taiwan. The Chinese Journal of Communication, 4(3), 321-338.
• Johnson, I. (2016). Media Censorship in China. Salem Press Encyclopedia.
• United Nations. (n.d.). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
• Holt, K. (2012). Internet Censorship: A Comparative Analysis. Canadian Journal of Law & Technology, 10(1), 153-179.
• Wu, Y. (2017). Censorship, Not a Solution: An Analysis of Internet Filtering in China. Journal of Current Chinese Affairs, 46(3), 3-30.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

6 pages / 2701 words

2 pages / 997 words

3 pages / 1296 words

2 pages / 1011 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Censorship

In the world of literature, there are certain themes that transcend time and culture, resonating with readers in profound ways. Two such works that delve into the complexities of human society are Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 [...]

Novel Fahrenheit 451 explores a dystopian society where books are outlawed, and critical thinking is discouraged. The society depicted in the novel is one where censorship and conformity are the norm, and individuals are [...]

The banning of William Faulkner's novel represents a troubling trend in our society - the censorship of artistic expression and the suppression of challenging ideas. By critically examining the reasons behind the ban and the [...]

Since its publication in 1951, J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye has been both celebrated and condemned for its portrayal of teenage rebellion, angst, and controversial language. The novel has been the subject of numerous [...]

Art has a long history of giving rise to vocal outrage, but should there be restrictions on how far to push the boundaries? Art is no stranger to the gasp-inducing; in fact, it often strives on it. It’s not unusual to encounter [...]

While some argue that censorship can protect society from harmful ideas, Fahrenheit 451 presents a counterargument that censorship can create a society that is intellectually stagnant and vulnerable to manipulation. By [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free