Category Archives: Censorship

Act of changing or suppressing speech or writing that is considered subversive of the common good. In the past, most governments believed it their duty to regulate the morals of their people; only with the rise in the status of the individual and individual rights did censorship come to seem objectionable. Censorship may be preemptive (preventing the publication or broadcast of undesirable information) or punitive (punishing those who publish or broadcast offending material). In Europe, both the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches practiced censorship, as did the absolute monarchies of the 17th and 18th centuries. Authoritarian governments such as those in China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and the former Soviet Union have employed pervasive censorship, which is generally opposed by underground movements engaged in the circulation of samizdat literature. In the U.S. in the 20th century, censorship focused largely on works of fiction deemed guilty of obscenity (e.g., James Joyce's Ulysses and D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover), though periodic acts of political censorship also occurred (e.g., the effort to purge school textbooks of possible left-wing content in the 1950s). In the late 20th century, some called for censorship of so-called hate speech, language deemed threatening (or sometimes merely offensive) to various subsections of the population. Censorship in the U.S. is usually opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union. In Germany after World War II it became a crime to deny the Holocaust or to publish pro-Nazi publications. See also Pentagon Papers.

Continue reading here:
Censorship - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster ...

Censorship -- the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society -- has been a hallmark of dictatorships throughout history. In the 20th Century, censorship was achieved through the examination of books, plays, films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other forms of communication for the purpose of altering or suppressing ideas found to be objectionable or offensive. The rationales for censorship have varied, with some censors targeting material deemed to be indecent or obscene; heretical or blasphemous; or seditious or treasonous. Thus, ideas have been suppressed under the guise of protecting three basic social institutions: the family, the church, and the state.

Not all censorship is equal, nor does all arise from government or external force. People self-censor all the time; such restraint can be part of the price of rational dialogue. The artist Ben Shahn's poster illustration reads: "You have not converted a man because you have silenced him." Silence can indicate a forced assent, or conversely, it can be contemplative, a necessary part of dialogue that rises above the din of quotidian life.

To understand censorship, and the impulse to censor, it is necessary to strip away the shock epithet value that is attached to the word at first utterance. One must recognize that censorship and the ideology supporting it go back to ancient times, and that every society has had customs, taboos, or laws by which speech, dress, religious observance, and sexual expression were regulated. In Athens, where democracy first emerged, censorship was well known as a means of enforcing the prevailing orthodoxy. Indeed, Plato was the first recorded thinker to formulate a rationale for intellectual, religious, and artistic censorship. In his ideal state outlined in The Republic, official censors would prohibit mothers and nurses from relating tales deemed bad or evil. Plato also proposed that unorthodox notions about God or the hereafter be treated as crimes and that formal procedures be established to suppress heresy. Freedom of speech in Ancient Rome was reserved for those in positions of authority. The poets Ovid and Juvenal were both banished, and authors of seditious writings were punished severely. The emperor Nero deported his critics and burned their books.

The organized church soon joined the state as an active censor. The Biblical injunction, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord, thy God, in vain" is clearly an early attempt to set limits on what would be acceptable theological discourse. Likewise, "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" is an attempt to set limits on how the Divine may or may not be represented. (And no one, in any land, should think this is anachronistic. Across the world today, appeals to divinity are common reasons for banning the dissemination of a broad range of materials). Censorship is no more acceptable for being practiced in the name of religion than for national security (which is certainly an acceptable secular substitute for religious rationales in the 20th Century). It only indicates that confronting censorship must always involve confronting some part of ourselves and our common history that is both painful and deep-seated.

Unique historical considerations can also spawn censorship. Perhaps the best example is the "Hasprache" (hate speech) law in Germany. It is illegal, under German law, to depict any kind of glorification of the Nazis or even to display the emblem of the swastika. The law is enforced to the point where even historical battle simulations may not use the actual emblems that were used during World War II (by the Waffen SS, for instance). Significantly, almost all of Germany's close neighbors and allies have similar laws. The questions in Germany and elsewhere in the European Union (EU) form a particularly hard case because of the historical background and because the situation in the EU is fast-moving. That is why this series of snapshots of conditions in various countries and regions will first deal with other areas and levels of censorship and access problems, and then return to the situation in the EU.

In a global context, governments have used a powerful array of techniques and arguments to marshal support for their censorship efforts. One of the earliest, as noted, is the religious argument. Certain things are deemed to be offensive in the eyes of the Deity. These things vary from country to country, religion to religion, even sect to sect. They are mostly, though not always, sexual in nature. The commentaries on the nature of the impulse to be censorious towards sexual expression are too numerous even for a wide ranging project like this. The curious reader is urged to read far and wide in the classic texts to see that the problem of governments and citizens reacting in this way is not a new one. What is new are the potential global consequences.

National security and defense runs a very close second to the religious impulse as a rationale for suppression. While nowhere near as old as the religious impulse to censor, in its more modern form it has been even more pervasive. And while the influence of religion on secular affairs is muted in certain parts of the world, the influence of governments usually is not. It is difficult to think of any government that would forego the power, in perceived extreme circumstances, to censor all media, not simply those that appear online. The question, asked in a real world scenario, is what could be considered extreme enough circumstances to justify such action?

There are also forms of censorship that are not so obtrusive, and that have to be examined very carefully to define. "Censorship through intimidation" can be anything from threats against individuals to a government proposing to monitor all activities online (as in one proposal current at the time of this writing in Russia). If citizens feel their activities online will be screened by governmental agencies in their country, their inclination to engage in expression will be much less than if their government stays away -- the classic "chilling effect."

"Censorship through consensus" is also a real possibility. There are countries where the adherence to a shared social, though not religious, code is a fact of life. Understanding that entails discerning where the boundaries of expression are, and where they might be interfered with in a consensus situation.

Economic censorship is more difficult to define. The Roman essayist Cicero used the immortal phrase "Cui bono?" (Who Profits? -- the ancient version of our "Follow the money."). But numbers may tell only part of the story. In a situation where there is economic censorship, is it isolated or undertaken in conjunction with some type of political censorship? Is there a monopoly within a certain country that is threatened by competition, or a class of oligarchs that is threatened by the emergence of real economic opportunity for smaller firms? Is the economy in a locale more prone to monopolistic arrangements than to genuine competition and innovation?

Follow this link:
What is Censorship?

The total number of users of Chinese microblogs, like Sina Corp.'s (NASDAQ:SINA) Weibo, fell from 308.6 million in 2012 to 280.8 million in 2013, according to a report from the government agency China Internet Network Information Center. The agency attributed the 9 percent drop to growing competition from social networking and mobile messaging applications on smartphones, such as WeChat, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

But another possible cause, which the report does not mention, may be the Chinese governments crackdown on microblogs, which have given many Chinese -- dissidents or just disgruntled citizens -- a platform to voice their opinions on a range of issues, from government corruption and environmental degradation to sports and pop stars. Many controversial news items and topics were widely shared on Weibo; many use the platform to comment before government censors quickly shut them down.

The campaign has led to the warning and arrests of high-profile bloggers and commentators, and many analysts have warned that the crackdown may dampen microblog use.

The report did not specify its data collection methods, or which microblogs were studied. Between June and September of 2013, Sina Corp. said daily active users for its Weibo service, the largest microblogging platform in China, grew 11.2 percent to 60.2 million, and a Sina spokesperson said the numbers in the new report didnt match statistics from the companys most recent earnings. The spokesman added that no organization had been in contact with it about collecting statistics on its user base, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Despite the opaque source of the reports data, it is still a strong indication that users are shifting from Weibo to newer social media platforms using smartphones. At the end of September, WeChat had 272 million monthly active users, more than double of what it had just a year earlier.

Conversely, the report said the total number of Chinese Internet users continued to grow. In 2013, the nation added 54 million users for a total of 618 million users, compared to 564 million in 2012. In addition, 73 percent of Chinese Internet users were getting online access through their mobile phones, and the total number of mobile Internet users rose to 500 million at the end of 2013, from 420 million at the end of 2012, according to the Wall Street Journal.

See the original post here:
Number Of Chinese Microbloggers Fell, Due To Censorship And Competition From Mobile Messaging Applications

Leonardo DiCaprio's hit new film The Wolf of Wall Street has hit a censorship wall overseas as film bosses in India, Malaysia, Singapore and Nepal have either demanded major cuts to sex scenes or banned the Martin Scorsese project outright.

Indian censors insisted film bosses cut three scenes before they agreed to a limited release, while the movie has been banned in Malaysia and Nepal, according to The Hollywood Reporter, and a whopping 45 minutes had to be cut from the film before censors in the United Arab Emirates agreed to a release.

A spokesman for the film's production company, Red Granite Pictures, says, "Some of the content in the film makes it difficult in certain territories where they have censorship and can even ban films.

"You try to make a film for a worldwide audience. This is a spectacular movie, all three hours of it. It's a shame that certain countries don't allow art to be screened in its entirety."

The scenes that have upset censors overseas include a gay orgy, Jonah Hill's public masturbation sequence and the opening of the film, which features DiCaprio blowing cocaine into a woman's butt using a straw.

Despite the controversial scenes, The Wolf of Wall Street and its leading man are expected to pick up Academy Award nods when the nominations are announced on Thursday morning.

WENN.com

Visit link:
Wolf of Wall Street faces cuts, bans

Open your eyes and analyzes generator existence and eternal life demonstrated video!
You are intellectually sequestered. I gave you a place for information and betrayal at: secret, terrorism, censorship, trap, plot, hatred, discrimination, pr...

By: Milano Italia

Excerpt from:
Open your eyes and analyzes generator existence and eternal life demonstrated video! - Video

Aprite gli occhi e analisati generatore esistenza e vita eterna dimostrato video!
You are intellectually sequestered. I gave you a place for information and betrayal at: secret, terrorism, censorship, trap, plot, hatred, discrimination, pr...

By: Milano Italia

See more here:
Aprite gli occhi e analisati generatore esistenza e vita eterna dimostrato video! - Video

Instead, the press has established a fully independent body to police its activities, known as the Independent Press Standards Organisation (Ipso). It will be able to impose fines of up to 1 million.

Vincent Peyrgne, chief executive of the association, said that the government's plans for press regulation could have "far-reaching consequences across the globe".

He said: "Any threats to the independence of journalism in Britain could be used by repressive regimes worldwide to justify their own controls over the press.

"We will endeavour to investigate all elements that threaten the United Kingdom's position as a bastion for free and independent media with the same rigour as we have approached other international press freedom hot spots in nearly 70 years of defending freedom of expression worldwide."

The organisation's missions are normally reserved for regimes where there are severe concerns about censorship, including Ethiopia, Libya, Yemen and Burma.

The delegation will also speak to freedom of expression and civil society groups, professional bodies, various industry representatives and academics.

The mission will include representatives of newspapers in Denmark, Norway, Finland, Canada, the USA and Pakistan. The delegation hopes to publish its UK report in February.

Original post:
'Repressive regimes' could use press regulations to justify censorship

LEONARDO DiCaprio's hit new film The Wolf Of Wall Street has hit a censorship wall overseas as film bosses in India, Malaysia, Singapore and Nepal have either demanded major cuts to sex scenes or banned the Martin Scorsese project outright.

Indian censors insisted film bosses cut three scenes before they agreed to a limited release, while the movie has been banned in Malaysia and Nepal, according to The Hollywood Reporter, and a whopping 45 minutes had to be cut from the film before censors in the United Arab Emirates agreed to a release.

A spokesman for the film's production company, Red Granite Pictures, says, "Some of the content in the film makes it difficult in certain territories where they have censorship and can even ban films.

"You try to make a film for a worldwide audience. This is a spectacular movie, all three hours of it. It's a shame that certain countries don't allow art to be screened in its entirety."

The scenes that have upset censors overseas include a gay orgy, Jonah Hill's public masturbation sequence and the opening of the film, which features DiCaprio blowing cocaine into a woman's butt using a straw.

Despite the controversial scenes, The Wolf of Wall Street and its leading man are expected to pick up Academy Award nods when the nominations are announced on Thursday morning (16Jan14).

Go here to read the rest:
International Censors Butcher And Ban The Wolf Of Wall Street

"Flip the Channel Welcome to Self Censorship." Journey TV
The Journey with Kay Andrea, a discussion on monitoring what we watch, hear and listen to that may affect our actions.

By: The Journey Kay Brown

More here:
"Flip the Channel Welcome to Self Censorship." Journey TV - Video

Citizens Sliced By The Censorship - BLANKFIELD
Original song by BLANKFIELD. Visit its website for mp3 downloads: http://blankfield.but.jp/ Picture from the anime Futari wa Pretty Cure (Nagisa (Cure Black)...

By: mystblood

More:
Citizens Sliced By The Censorship - BLANKFIELD - Video