Your thoughts on media censorship

Don't you just hate it when the media industry censors their material?

After a hard day at work, you just want to go home and watch what's hot these days, but then when you turn it on, you find yourself bombarded by all sorts of censorship.

Censorship that hides the truth.

Censorship that just gets in the way of your pleasure.

Sometimes it's crudely done as well, where large sections of the material is blotched out. Other times it's not so bad; you can barely see it but you know it's there.

Censorship is bad right?

Media should remain censor-free right?

I know. We should have an option to censor certain things we want to be blind to, individually.

  - this post deleted by administrator god -

  - this post deleted by administrator god -

NO I KEPT THE ORIGINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dang it... I failed.

NO I KEPT THE ORIGINAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dang it... I failed.

- reply deleted by administrator god ... yet again! -

dun dun dun.....

All censorship and other restrictions on access to information are wrong.

i oppose censorship, it is limiting my need for knowledge

I oppose Soompi's censoring program, it limits me from speaking about PCD (When I Grow Up anyone?)

censorship in media industry, is totally a bad idea for people who did them. As in, a whole team of crews who have been spending days/weeks/months/years to produce something. And because of 'certain' part, and it got censored. And as we know, every part in the song/video/clip/photo or whatever that is in it have their own meaning. When you censor it, what's the point then?

But in governments stand or whatever it is, they might not look at these points, but only like 'no, we cant show that cause we have younger generation. we do not want these "wrong" information mislead them'

However, they have forgotten that, younger generations have the ability to 'find out the truth' online. So, what's the point of working so hard to censor them and assuming 'nahhh none of them realize'. 

It's just a point of view from myself, as a media student coincidentally haha!

I have done exactly the same topic in my assignment in college! Haha, had a really big argument with my coursemates tho.

And because of 'certain' part, and it got censored.

Ya like totally, wtf I've never really understood why there are censorship laws like this!

All the time, I see random comments in videos making cracks at it.

I guess there are some things the younger generation shouldn't see, but it's not like censorship is lifted when you obtain the content as an adult.

Of course, both the younger generation and adults are able to go online and find out the truth anyways, so it is only a waste of time for the government and the media company. Plus it probably affects sales as well.

Ya, I really don't see the benefit of all this censorship.

"Censorship" is simply a bureaucratic term to justify the bigots.

No government action = not against First Amendment. A business owner should have the ability to control what his business says or does not say. If I own a magazine, I should have the ability to say, "you can't make racist statements in my magazine." If you don't like that, then you should just work for another magazine. The government should not have the right to control what businesses say or do not say (or, for that matter, individuals). And, for all extensive purposes, the United States is extremely liberal when it comes to allowing freedom of speech. It is almost impossible, for example, for a foreign defamation judgment to be enforced in the United States since most foreign countries (including European countries) have more restrictive freedom of speech rights than the United States.

That said, there are limitations to what you can broadcast. You can't broadcast, say, a porno of a woman having sex with a horse on PBS because of certain regulations. This is within the government's power to regulate under the US Supreme Court's construction of protected speech. Not all speech is protected because not all speech has value. There is no real social or political value in child pornography, for example. However, just because the government CAN censor does not mean it will censor. Oregon (or Washington...one of those states) has voted to allow obscenity. That means, if you want national television to show women blowing donkeys, then you have to get out there and vote for candidates that promise to put obscenity on television by repealing the regulations that do not allow it. And, if you don't get this done, then that just means you are a legislative loser--aka someone who doesn't get their way, just like how, in democracies, there is ALWAYS someone who doesn't get their way.

So breakdown:

1) if you're a private business, then you can censor whatever the hell you want.

2) if you're the government then you can only censor unprotected speech (fighting words, obscenity, etc.--and this field of speech is extremely narrow. There is, practically speaking, no such thing as hate speech after R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul. Courts have almost always given cases of media censorship strict scrutiny analysis. The only type of speech that is categorically eliminated as protected speech is child pornography.)

3) if you want to lift censorship to unprotected speech, then you can VOTE FOR IT. The government can limit certain types of speech through statute, but statutes can be repealed. (Yes, if enough people vote for it, then child pornography can be legal)

4) if you don't get what you want through voting, then get over it--a democracy does not entitle you to getting your way.