LaettnerFulford

Ms.Sanchez
EnglishIV
28April2015
Censorship
Censorshipiswhenagrouporanindividualdeemsapieceofinformationorastory
containingfictionalornonfictionalinformationunsuitableforthepublic.Censorshipcanalso
happenwhenanindividualorgroupbelievesthatthecontentcanbedamagingtotheir
reputation.However,thepowerofcensorshipcansometimesbeoverusedorused
inappropriately.Whenthishappensitcanbearguedthatcertainaspectsofcensorshipinvade
rightspromisedwithinthefirstamendment.Theconceptofcensorshipisideal,thetheorythat
harmfulanddangerousinformationcanbecontrolledanddisposedofbeforereachingthepublic
seemspromising.Thereishowever,anissuethatallowscensorshiptobeconsidered
unconstitutionalandunethical.ThatissueisthatU.S.citizensarepromisedbytheBillOfRights
tobeabletopublish,say,andaccesswhattheywant.Thefirstamendmentgrantseveryfree
citizenfreedomofspeechandpress.Theproblemswithcensorshipextendbeyondalegal
standpoint.Theyalsooccurinethicalreasoning.Anexemplificationofthisisthatcollege
studentsandhighschoolstudentsfacerepressioneachandeveryday,whichactuallycancause
thelossofaqualityeducation.Unfortunately,theconceptthateverycitizenisofferedfree
speechisnottrue.Groupsorindividualsthatcensorothermaterialsandthoughtspreventthe
promiseoffreespeechandpressfromreachingitsfullpotential.Censorshipisoverusedby
certaingroupsandindividuals,anditshouldnotbeusedasheavilybecauseitviolatesfree


Fulford2

speech,italsoviolatesfreepress,anditalsohindersthereceivingofafulleducation,insome
cases.
Initially,censorshipdeniesAmericancitizensoftheirrightstofreespeech.Anexample
ofwrongfulcensorshippresentsitselfin
Schenckv.U.S.
.

Inthiscourtcase,Schenckwas
convictedformailingantiwarleafletstomenwhoqualifiedforthedraftforWWII.Apparently,
anythingthatstartsamovementagainstgovernmentactionorcouldpossiblyshiftthemoraleand
supportoftheAmericansisillegal.In1801,ThomasJeffersonrevokedtheSeditionActof1798,
thisactmadeitillegaltoessentiallyadmitorargueanythingaboutthegovernmentinanegative
manner.So,afterthisactwasdiminisheditwasmadelegalthatindividualscouldsayanything
aboutthegovernment,asidefromtreason,howeverSchenckwasimprisonedfordoingjustthat.
Anotherinstance,EugeneV.Debswassentencedtojailfor10yearsfortryingto
peacefullyrallyandcreateaunionwithotherworkersofhissameprofession.Notonlydoesthis
contradicttherighttofreespeech,italsoviolatestherightofpeacefulassembly.Afurther
understandingoffreedomofspeechisneededtoassessthisinstance.Violentthreatsarenota
partoffreespeech,sotheyarenotprotectedbytheBillOfRights.Anyhow,Debsstoryrecalls
thathesimplyorganizedaunionpeacefullyandnotbythreatstothepublicorotherpeople.
AnothernegativeaspectofcensorshipisthatitpreventsAmericanpeoplefrommaking
theirowndecisions.TellingtheAmericanpeoplewhatisrightandwrongtopostisnotonly
unnecessarybutisalsodegradingtothepeople.Americansaretaughtallthroughoutschoolwhat
isrightandwrong.Whentheyactuallyhavetheabilitytopromotetheirgeneralideasoflifeor
otherstandpointsonhottopics,theyfacethepossibilityofbeingcensored.


Fulford3

Also,allowingpowerfulindividualstohavethepowertocensorthingscouldultimately
leadintoanelitistsociety.Anotherproblemoflimitingspeechisitcouldalmostindefinitely
causeviolence.Peopleinthisageintimeareconsiderablypassionateabouttheirideasand
opinions.Tellingsomeonethattheirseeminglyharmlessopinionisunsuitableforpublicview
couldobviouslycauseabitofoutrage.
Wrongfulcensorshiphasonlyseemedtogrowthroughtheages.Although,thereisthe
occasionaltimethatcensorshiplawshaveactuallybeencraftedfortheprotectionofthe
Americanpeopleandnotthesilencingofthem.Anappropriateexampleofrightfulcensorshipis
theFreedomofAccesstoClinicEntrancesAct,thisactmakesitillegaltouseforceorthreatof
forceagainstabortionclinicsorproviders.Thisessentiallystatesthethreateningoractually
harmingprochoicepeoplebecauseoftheirdecisionsisanillegaloffense.Furthermore,the
governmenthasalsorightfullycensoredcigarettecompaniesfromproducingandairingtheir
productsthroughtelevisionorotherdevicesofmassmedia.Thankfullythegovernmenthas
madesuchthingsillegalbecauseallowingcompaniesthatproduceharmfulproductcouldnot
onlyharmtheadultsincountry,butalsotheveryimpressionablechildren.
Secondly,censorshipalsoviolatestherighttofreepress.Thegovernmentisinvested
withthepowerofcensorship.Thegovernmenthastheabilitytodecide,ingoodconscience,
whatshouldbeviewedinthemedia.Regrettably,thegovernmentoverusestheirpowerofthis.
Manytimesayear,unluckyindividualsareplacedincontainmentandsometimeseven
imprisonedforspeakingtheirmindonwhattheiropinionsnocertainthingsare.
BillMaher,anadvocateofselfcensorshipclaimsthatcensorshipshouldsolelybeleftin
thehandsofthepeople.Thisiswouldworkinamodelsociety.However,BillMaherisnot


Fulford4

exactlywrong,selfcensorshipshouldbethebaseofcensorship.Ofcoursethegovernment
shouldhaveaslightsayinwhatispublished.Nonetheless,thegovernmentandindividualsmust
haveaclearunderstandingthattheenglishlanguageis,inasense,alivingbreathingthing.The
englishlanguageisalwaysrapidlygrowingandtheconnotationsofwordsareforeverchanging.
Ifthepeoplewhowishedtocensorthingscouldclearlygraspthisthencensorshipwouldprove
tobeamoreeffectiveandreasonableidea.
Although,censoringofthewrongthingscanhurttheAmericanpeople.Forinstance,
censoringcomediansstripsthemoftheirneedtocomicallyexpressthemselves.Peoplein
Americashouldbepromisedtherighttopublicallyexpressthemselvesandwhattheyfind
amusing.Alltoomanytimespeoplearesilencedwhensimplyattemptingtotelltheworldof
theirfavoriteideas.Theyarethenplacedwiththeburdenoffeelingthattheirthoughtsandideas
arenothingmorethansociallyunacceptableconceptsthathavethecharacteristicsofother
harmfulanddangerousthings.Thiscouldtrulyruinpeoplesmentalityandpossibleputahaltto
innovativethinking.
Thegovernmenthasmanyconflictsoffreepresswithinthematterofcensorship.Firstly,
thegovernmentoncedallowedaman,ThomasPaine,topublishwarpropaganda.Allowingthis
wouldbefineiftheyallowedopposingpartiestopublishequallyrelevantideas.Theyusuallydo
notallowsuchathing.Thegovernmentalsousescensorshipasasenseofprotectionof
reputation.Ifitwasnotbadenoughthegovernmentcensorstruthfulexposingworksthatpertain
tothegovernment,italsoallowsmegacorporationstodothesame.Thegovernmentessentially
watchesmegacorporationsbuildidealappearancesofthemselves.Thisismanipulativeandis


Fulford5

unconstitutionalandunethical.Ifthegovernmentistrustedwiththepowerofcensorship,it
shouldatleastbefairandhonestwiththecensoring.
Apartfromjustthegovernmentunrightfullycensoringthingsothergroupsalsocensor
importantinformations.Informationthatprovestosignificantforteachingallstudents.
Educationisarguablytheutmostimportantthingintodaysworld.Anindividualwithoutan
educationismostlikelynotgoingtoreachthesamegoalsassomeonewhoconsiderably
educatedandveryintelligent.So,educationshouldbetheleastcensoredthinginthecountry.
Sadly,educationisconsideredoneofthemostcensoredthinginAmericansociety.
Anexampleofeducationalcensorship,isthatinsomecollegeswhenfreshmenarrivethat
areinstructedtoattendclassessuchas,sensitivityanddiversitytrainingclasses.This
immediatelytakesthenewstudentsandreshapestheirimmatureyearningmindstocolleges
epitomeofaperfectmind.Thisoccursbyinstillingcensoredmaterialandonesidedmaterial
intothestudentsminds.
Collegesalsocensorindividualsforexpressingthemselvesinamannerthatgoesagainst
statusquo.Thispromotestheconceptthatdissentismorallywrong,wheninfact,dissentshould
berespectedandnotoppressed.Dissentingopinionshaveoftenbeenthefuelbehindthe
scientificfindingsthathavedictatedmodernscience.Byoppressingstudents,collegesoftenruin
thecreativemannerinwhichstudentsthink.Thecensorshipwouldnotbeperceivedasnearlyas
badifthestudentswerenottheonestakingtheblamefornotlearning.
Anothercaseofeducationalcensorshipiswhenschoolsallowinterestgroupstodictate
thecurriculumandwhatshouldandshouldnotbetaughtwithintheconfinesofschoolwalls.An
illustrationofthisisinTexas,USA,groupsofcreationisthavevirtuallymadeitalawtoeven


Fulford6

considerteachingaboutevolution.Evolutionisascientificallyprovenmethodandbyallowing
aninterestgrouptodecidethatitshouldnotbetaughtisbasicallyaskingforlesseducated
peopleintheworld.Unfortunately,itreachesbeyondjustonetopic.Interestgroupshavewentas
farasprotestingforcertainbookstobebanned.Withthiscensorshipwithintheeducationsystem
itisclearlypreventingstudentsfrombeingwelleducatedandisultimatelydamagingU.S.A.s
future.
Thisopposingideaofcensorship,whichisinfavorofcensorshipisthatnewlawsshould
beincorporatedintoAmericatopromotethecountryswellbeing.Mostoftheopinions
associatedwithmorecensorshippertaintothetechnologicalsideofthings.Lawsshouldbe
imposedonthepeople,lawsthatmostlydealwiththecontrollingoftheinternetandprevention
ofterrorism.Thereasoningbehindcensoringtheinternetisbecausetheinternetgrowsmorevast
eachandeverydayifnoteachandeverysecond.Congressshouldpasslawsthatpunishpeople
forpublishingorevensayingthingsthatcouldposeasathreattothecountrysintelligenceand
secrets.
Thepartyofopposingopinionsbelievesthatthegovernmenthastheauthoritytocensor
whattheyseefit.Thereisalsoanactcalled,TheUSAPATRIOTAct,whichgivesthe
governmentpowerofcensorshipforjustaboutanything.Ifthegovernmentweretoallowanyone
topublishwhattheywantfreely,itwouldsimplypollutethemindsofmillions.Theopposing
partyalsobelievesthatcensorshipactuallyprotectsthepeopleofAmerica.Lastly,theopposing
partysstrongestlogicisthattherearealreadylawssupportingcensorship,soitshouldbeleftat
that.


Fulford7

Therearemanyflawsinwithintheopposingpartysreasoning.Firstly,censoringthe
internetwouldjustprovetobeanunfulfillabletask.Theinternetisconstantlygrowingandevery
daythereisnewcontent.Also,somepartsoftheinternetthegovernmentwishestocensorare
outofthegovernmentsjurisdiction.Contentfromothercountriesontheinternetcannotbe
controlledbytheU.S.government.Furthermore,censoringtheinternetwouldsimplybeawaste
oftime,money,andresources.Secondly,theopposingpartystatesthatcensorshipisusedto
protectpeoplefromnegativeideas.Theideaofanegativeideaisadebatabletopicandcannot
solelybydecidedbyapartofthegovernment.Whatsomepeoplefindnegativeothersseeas
positiveandlikewise.Lastly,theopposingpartysuggestthatallowingpeopletofreelypublish
whatevertheywantcanenduppollutingthemindsofmillions.However,thegovernmentallows
just6megacorporationstocontrolalmostallofthecountrysmediaoutlets.Ifthegovernment
allowsmegacorporationstopublishandinfluencethemindsofnearlybillions,thenitshould
alsoletlessinfluentialindividualspublishwhattheyplease.
Inconclusion,censorshipisanoverusedpowerthatisusedessentiallytofunnelwhat
informationtheAmericanpeopleareallowedtoaccess.Thegovernmentsconceptofwhat
censorshipshouldbeisfallacious.Theirideaisthattheyhavethepowertodiscardwhatever
informationtheyplease,whichleadstounrightfulcensorshipandprohibitsAmericansfromtruly
expressingthemselvesfreely.ThroughoutthehistoryofAmerica,departmentsandagencieshave
existedandhavebeeneradicated.Manytimethesedepartmentsandagencieshavebeenfound
unconstitutionalandproventhatcensorshipitselfisnearlyillegal.Itisapparentthatcensorship
shouldvaguelybeusedbutinsteadisoverusedbyindividualsandthegovernment.