censorship essay introduction

2000

111

85

25

1

7

0

0

2001

346

113

33

6

6

1

0

2002

13,922

185

166

38

7

0

0

2003

166,683

122

217

36

3

0

0

2004

1,405,419

145

140

29

9

3

0

2005

233,531

488

707

355

0

0

0

TV-Y

Appropriate for all children

, ,

TV-Y7

Designed for children ages 7 and up

,

TV-Y7-FV

Directed toward older children; includes depictions of fantasy violence

, ,

TV-G

Suitable for general audiences; contains little or no violence, no strong language, and little or no sexual material

, ,

TV-PG

Parental guidance suggested

, ,

TV-14

Parents strongly cautioned; contains suggestive dialogue, strong language, and sexual or violent situations

, ,

TV-MA

Mature audiences only

, ,

EC

Designed for early childhood, children ages 3 and older

, ,

E

Suitable for everyone over the age of 6; contains minimal fantasy violence and mild language

, , ,

E 10+

Appropriate for ages 10 and older; may contain more violence and/or slightly suggestive themes

, , ,

T

Content is appropriate for teens (ages 13 and older); may contain violence, crude humor, sexually suggestive themes, use of strong language, and/or simulated gambling

, ,

M

Mature content for ages 17 and older; includes intense violence and/or sexual content

, , ,

AO

Adults (18+) only; contains graphic sexual content and/or prolonged violence

,

Writing does not flourish under censorship. This does not mean that the censor's edict, or the internalized figure of the censor, is the sole or even the principal pressure on the writer: there are forms of repression, inherited, acquired, or self-imposed, that can be more grievously felt. There may even be cases where external censorship challenges the writer in interesting ways or spurs creativity. But the Aesopian ruses that censorship provokes are usually no more than ingenious; while the obstacles that writers are capable of visiting upon themselves are surely sufficient in number and variety for them not to invite more.

Nevertheless, for the common good, for the good of the state, apparatuses of regulation and control are from time to time set up, which grow and entrench themselves, as is the wont of bureaucracies. It is hard for any writer to contemplate the scale of such apparatuses without a disbelieving smile. If representations, mere shadows, are indeed so dangerous, one reflects, then surely the appropriate countermeasures are other representations, counterrepresentations. If mockery corrodes respect for the state, if blasphemy insults God, if pornography demeans the passions, surely it will suffice if stronger and more convincing countervoices are raised defending the authority of the state, praising God, exalting chaste love.

This response is wholly in accord with the teleology of liberalism, which believes in throwing open the marketplace to contending forces because in the long run the market tends to the good, that is to say, to progress, which liberalism understands in a historical and even metaphysical light. It is wholly at odds with the outlook of the more austere branches of Islam, Judaism, and Protestant Christianity, which, detecting a seductive and devilish force at the root of the power of representation, and thus having no reason to expect that, in a war of representations, a war without rules, good representations will triumph, prefer to ban graven images.

We have here reached the entry-point into a debate about the rights of the individual as against the rights of the collectivity which is familiar enough not to need extended rehearsal and to which I have nothing to contribute except perhaps a caution against the kind of moral vigilance that defines vulnerable classes of people and sets about protecting them from harms whose nature they must be kept blind to because (the argument goes) merely to know the harm is to suffer it. I refer here primarily to children, though the same argument has been made in respect of so-called simple believers. We are concerned to protect children, in good part to protect them from the consequences of their limitless curiosity about sexual matters. But we should not forget that children experience control of their explorations—control which by its own premises cannot spell out exactly what it is that is forbidden—not as protection but as frustration. From the measures adults take to deny the satisfaction of children's curiosity, may children not legitimately infer that their curiosity is censurable; and from the explanations with which they are provided for being constrained—explanations riddled with holes—may they not infer that they are not respected as moral agents? May the ethical wrong done to the child in the process not be more durable than any harm it may suffer from following wherever curiosity leads?

This is neither an argument for keeping sexually explicit materials away from children nor an argument against it. It is a reflection on how harms weigh up against each other, on balancing imponderables, choosing between evils. In making such choices we might include in our reckoning the consideration that to a small child the things that adults do with or to each other's bodies are not only intriguing and disturbing but ugly and funny too, even silly; the consideration, too, that whether or not the child succeeds in blocking the thought that what the people do in the picture its parents may do too, it is hard for the parent not to project this thought upon the child, and, reexperiencing it through the child, to be embarrassed, ashamed, and even angry. Nor should we forget who is most embarrassed when to the candid gaze of a child spectacles of gross adult nakedness are exposed. The moment is a complex one; but included in our desire to keep such sights from the child may there not be a wish not to descend, by association, in the child's esteem, not to become the object of the child's disgust or amusement? Max Scheler distinguishes between the nakedness of an Aphrodite sculpted with such awe that she seems to have a veil of modesty about her, and the "deanimation," or loss of soul, that occurs when primitive or childish wonder is lost, and the naked body is seen with knowing eyes. He links deanimation to what he calls the "apperceptive breaking out" of the sexual organs from the body: no longer seen as integral with the body, nor yet as "fields of expression of inner and passionate movements," the sexual organs—particularly, one might note, the male apparatus, with its appearance of extruded viscera—threaten to become objects of disgust. It is not strange that we should wish to preserve the childhood of children by protecting them from such sights; but whose sensibilities are we in the first place guarding, theirs or our own?

The sexual organs, observes Saint Augustine, move independently of the will. Sometimes they respond to what we do not want them to respond to; sometimes they remain "frozen" when we want to employ them. From this disobedience of the flesh, mark of a fallen state, none are exempt, not even the guardians of our morals. A censor pronouncing a ban, whether on an obscene spectacle or a derisive imitation, is like a man trying to stop his penis from standing up. The spectacle is ridiculous, so ridiculous that he is soon a victim not only of his unruly member but of pointing fingers, laughing voices. That is why the institution of censorship has to surround itself with secondary bans on the infringement of its dignity. From being sour to being laughed at for being sour to banning laughter at what is sour is an all-too-familiar progression in tyranny, one that should give us further cause for caution.

In the above similitude, I need hardly point out that the one who pronounces the ban does not have to be male. The one who pronounces the ban by that act lays claim to the phallus, but the phallus in its mundane form as penis. Taking up the position of censor, this one becomes, in effect, the blind one, the one at the center of the ring in the game of blind man's buff. For a time, until the blindfold that at the same time marks him, elevates him, and disables him can be passed on, it is his fate to be the fool who stumbles about, laughed at and evaded. If the spirit of the game, the spirit of the child, is to reign, the censor must accept the clownship that goes with blind kingship. The censor who refuses to be a clown, who tears off the blindfold and accuses and punishes the laughers, is not playing the game. He thereby becomes, in Erasmus's paradox, the true fool, or rather, the false fool. He is a fool because he does not know himself a fool, because he thinks that, being in the center of the ring, he is king.

Children are not, qua children, innocent. We have all been children and know—unless we prefer to forget—how little innocent we were, what determined efforts of indoctrination it took to make us into innocents, how often we tried to escape from the staging-camp of childhood and how implacably we were herded back. Nor do we inherently possess dignity. We are certainly born without dignity, and we spend enough time by ourselves, hidden from the eyes of others, doing the things that we do when we are by ourselves, to know how little of it we can honestly lay claim to. We also see enough of animals concerned for their dignity (cats, for instance) to know how comical pretensions to dignity can be.

Innocence is a state in which we try to maintain our children; dignity is a state we claim for ourselves. Affronts to the innocence of our children or to the dignity of our persons are attacks not upon our essential being but upon constructs—constructs by which we live, but constructs nevertheless. This is not to say that affronts to innocence or dignity are not real affronts, or that the outrage with which we respond to them is not real, in the sense of not being sincerely felt. The infringements are real; what is infringed, however, is not our essence but a foundational fiction to which we more or less wholeheartedly subscribe, a fiction that may well be indispensable for a just society, namely, that human beings have a dignity that sets them apart from animals and consequently protects them from being treated like animals. (It is even possible that we may look forward to a day when animals will have their own dignity ascribed to them, and the ban will be reformulated as a ban on treating a living creature like a thing.)

The fiction of dignity helps to define humanity and the status of humanity helps to define human rights. There is thus a real sense in which an affront to our dignity strikes at our rights. Yet when, outraged at such affront, we stand on our rights and demand redress, we would do well to remember how insubstantial the dignity is on which those rights are based. Forgetting where our dignity comes from, we may fall into a posture as comical as that of the irate censor.

Life, says Erasmus's Folly, is theater: we each have lines to say and a part to play. One kind of actor, recognizing that he is in a play, will go on playing nevertheless; another kind of actor, shocked to find he is participating in an illusion, will try to step off the stage and out of the play. The second actor is mistaken. For there is nothing outside the theater, no alternative life one can join instead. The show is, so to speak, the only show in town. All one can do is to go on playing one's part, though perhaps with a new awareness, a comic awareness.

We thus arrive at a pair of Erasmian paradoxes. A dignity worthy of respect is a dignity without dignity (which is quite different from unconscious or unaffected dignity); an innocence worthy of respect is an innocence without innocence. As for respect itself, it is tempting to suggest that this is a superfluous concept, though for the workings of the theater of life it may turn out to be indispensable. True respect is a variety of love and may be subsumed under love; to respect someone means, inter alia, to forgive that person an innocence that, outside the theater, would be false, a dignity that would be risible.

  Copyright notice: Excerpt from pages 11-15 of Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship by J. M. Coetzee, published by the University of Chicago Press. ©1996 by the University of Chicago. All rights reserved. This text may be used and shared in accordance with the fair-use provisions of U.S. copyright law, and it may be archived and redistributed in electronic form, provided that this entire notice, including copyright information, is carried and provided that the University of Chicago Press is notified and no fee is charged for access. Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this text on other terms, in any medium, requires the consent of the University of Chicago Press. J. M. Coetzee Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship Cloth $24.95 ISBN: 0-226-11174-1 Paper $15.00 ISBN: 0-226-11176-8 ©1996, 304 pages For information on purchasing the book—from bookstores or here online—please go to the webpage for Giving Offense .

University of Chicago Press: 1427 E. 60th Street Chicago, IL 60637 USA | Voice: 773.702.7700 | Fax: 773.702.9756 Privacy Policies Site Map Bibliovault Chicago Manual of Style Turabian University of Chicago Awards --> Twitter Facebook YouTube

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction
• The status of "individuality”
• Requirements of self-government
• “Freedom of expression”

Ancient Greece and Rome

Ancient israel and early christianity, ancient china.

• Medieval Christendom
• The 17th and 18th centuries
• The system in the former Soviet Union
• Censorship under a military government
• Freedom of the press
• Freedom and truth
• Character and freedom

History of censorship

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• University of Washington Pressbooks - Media and Society: Critical Approaches - Censorship and Freedom of Speech
• Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University - Censorship
• The Canadian Encyclopedia - Censorship
• Oklahoma State University - School of Media and Strategic Communications - Defining Censorship
• Humanities LibreTexts - Censorship
• Frontiers - Racism and censorship in the editorial and peer review process
• Cato Institute - Shining a Light on Censorship: How Transparency Can Curtail Government Social Media Censorship and More
• American Library Association - First Amendment and Censorship
• censorship - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• censorship - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

It should be instructive to consider how the problem of censorship has been dealt with in the ancient world, in premodern times, and in the modern world. Care must be taken here not to assume that the modern democratic regime, of a self-governing people, is the only legitimate regime. Rather, it is prudent to assume that most of those who have, in other times and places, thought about and acted upon such matters have been at least as humane and as sensible in their circumstances as modern democrats are apt to be in theirs.

It was taken for granted in the Greek communities of antiquity, as well as in Rome, that citizens would be formed in accordance with the character and needs of the regime. This did not preclude the emergence of strong-minded men and women, as may be seen in the stories of Homer , of Plutarch , of Tacitus , and of the Greek playwrights. But it was evident, for example, that a citizen of Sparta was much more apt to be tough and unreflective (and certainly uncommunicative) than a citizen of Corinth (with its notorious openness to pleasure and luxury).

The scope of a city-state ’s concern was exhibited in the provisions it made for the establishment and promotion of religious worship. That “the gods of the city” were to be respected by every citizen was usually taken for granted. Presiding over religious observances was generally regarded as a privilege of citizenship: thus, in some cities it was an office in which the elderly in good standing could be expected to serve. A refusal to conform, at least outwardly, to the recognized worship of the community subjected one to hardships. And there could be difficulties, backed up by legal sanctions, for those who spoke improperly about such matters. The force of religious opinions could be seen not only in prosecutions for refusals to acknowledge the gods of the city but perhaps even more in the frequent unwillingness of a city (no matter what its obvious political or military interests) to conduct public business at a time when the religious calendar, auspices , or other such signs forbade civic activities. Indicative of respect for the proprieties was the secrecy with which the religious mysteries, such as those into which many Greek and Roman men were initiated, were evidently practiced—so much so that there does not seem to be any record from antiquity of precisely what constituted the various mysteries. Respect for the proprieties may be seen as well in the outrage provoked in Sparta by a poem by Archilochus (7th century bce ) in which he celebrated his lifesaving cowardice.

Athens , it can be said, was much more liberal than the typical Greek city. This is not to suggest that the rulers of the other cities did not, among themselves, freely discuss the public business. But in Athens the rulers included much more of the population than in most cities of antiquity—and freedom of speech (for political purposes) spilled over there into the private lives of citizens. This may be seen, perhaps best of all, in the famous funeral address given by Pericles in 431 bce . Athenians, he pointed out, did not consider public discussion merely something to be put up with; rather, they believed that the best interests of the city could not be served without a full discussion of the issues before the assembly. There may be seen in the plays of an Aristophanes the kind of uninhibited discussions of politics that the Athenians were evidently accustomed to, discussions that could (in the license accorded to comedy ) be couched in licentious terms not permitted in everyday discourse.

The limits of Athenian openness may be seen, of course, in the trial, conviction , and execution of Socrates in 399 bce on charges that he corrupted the youth and that he did not acknowledge the gods that the city did but acknowledged other new divinities of his own. One may see as well, in the Republic of Plato , an account of a system of censorship, particularly of the arts, that is comprehensive . Not only are various opinions (particularly misconceptions about the gods and about the supposed terrors of death) to be discouraged, but various salutary opinions are to be encouraged and protected without having to be demonstrated to be true. Much of what is said in the Republic and elsewhere reflects the belief that the vital opinions of the community could be shaped by law and that men could be penalized for saying things that offended public sensibilities, undermined common morality , or subverted the institutions of the community.

The circumstances justifying the system of comprehensive “thought control” described in Plato’s Republic are obviously rarely to be found. Thus, Socrates himself is recorded in the same dialogue (and in Plato’s Apology ) as recognizing that cities with bad regimes do not permit their misconduct to be questioned and corrected. Such regimes should be compared with those in the age of the good Roman emperors, the period from Nerva (c. 30–98 ce ) to Marcus Aurelius (121–180)—the golden times, said Tacitus, when everyone could hold and defend whatever opinions he wished.

Much of what can be said about ancient Greece and Rome could be applied, with appropriate adaptations , to ancient Israel . The stories of the difficulties encountered by Jesus , and the offenses he came to be accused of, indicate the kinds of restrictions to which the Jews were subjected with respect to religious observances and with respect to what could and could not be said about divine matters. (The inhibitions so established were later reflected in the manner in which Moses Maimonides [1135–1204] proceeded in his publications, often relying upon “hints” rather than upon explicit discussion of sensitive topics.) The prevailing watchfulness, lest someone say or do what he should not, can be said to be anticipated by the commandment “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” (Exodus 20:7). It may be seen as well in the ancient opinion that there is a name for God that must not be uttered .

It should be evident that this way of life—directing both opinions and actions and extending down to minute daily routines—could not help but shape a people for centuries, if not for millennia, to come. But it should also be evident that those in the position to know, and with a duty to act, were expected to speak out and were, in effect, licensed to do so, however cautiously they were obliged to proceed on occasion. Thus, the prophet Nathan dared to challenge King David himself for what he had done to secure Bathsheba as his wife (II Samuel 12:1–24). On an earlier, perhaps even more striking, occasion, the patriarch Abraham dared to question God about the terms on which Sodom and Gomorrah might be saved from destruction (Genesis 18:16–33). God made concessions to Abraham, and David crumbled before Nathan’s authority . But such presumptuousness on the part of mere mortals is possible, and likely to bear fruit, only in communities that have been trained to share and to respect certain moral principles grounded in thoughtfulness.

The thoughtfulness to which the Old Testament aspires is suggested by the following counsel by Moses to the people of Israel (Deuteronomy 4:5–6):

Behold, I have taught you statutes and ordinances, as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land which you are entering to take possession of it. Keep them and do them; for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.”

This approach can be considered to provide the foundation for the assurance that has been so critical to modern arguments against censorship (John 8:32): “And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” Further biblical authority against censorship may be found in such “free speech” dramas as that described in Acts 4:13–21.

It should be remembered that to say everything one thought or believed was regarded by pre-Christian writers as potentially irresponsible or licentious: social consequences dictated a need for restraint. Christian writers, however, called for just such saying of everything as the indispensable witness of faith: transitory social considerations were not to impede, to the extent that they formerly had, the exercise of such a liberty, indeed of such a duty, so intimately related to the eternal welfare of the soul . Thus, we see an encouragement of the private—of an individuality that turned eventually against organized religion itself and legitimated a radical self-indulgence.

Perhaps no people has ever been so thoroughly trained, on such a large scale and for so long, as the Chinese. Critical to that training was a system of education that culminated in a rigorous selection, by examination, of candidates for administrative posts. Particularly influential was the thought of Confucius (551–479 bce ), with its considerable emphasis upon deference to authority and to family elders and upon respect for ritual observances and propriety. Cautiousness in speech was encouraged; licentious expressions were discouraged; and long-established teachings were relied upon for shaping character. All in all, it was contrary to Chinese good taste to speak openly of the faults of one’s government or of one’s rulers. And so it could be counseled by Confucius, “He who is not in any particular office has nothing to do with plans for the administration of its duties” ( Analects [ Lunyu ], 7:14). It has been suggested that such sentiments have operated to prevent the spread in China of opinions supportive of political liberty.

Still, it could be recognized by Confucius that “oppressive government is fiercer than a tiger.” He could counsel that if a ruler’s words are not good, and if people are discouraged from opposing them, the ruin of the country can be expected ( Analects , 13:5). Blatant oppressiveness, and an attempt to stamp out the influence of Confucius and of other sages, could be seen in the wholesale destruction of books in China in 231 bce . But the Confucian mode was revived thereafter, to become the dominant influence for almost two millennia. Its pervasiveness may well be judged oppressive by contemporary Western standards, since so much depended, it seems, on mastering the orthodox texts and discipline .

Whether or not the typical Chinese government was indeed oppressive, effective control of information was lodged in the authorities, since access to the evidently vital public archives of earlier administrations was limited to a relative few. In addition, decisive control of what was thought, and how, depended in large part on a determination of what the authoritative texts were—something that has been critical in the West, as well, in the establishment of useful canons, both sacred and secular . Thus, Richard McKeon has suggested, “Censorship may be the enforcement of judgments based on power, passion, corruption, or prejudice—political, popular, elite, or sectarian. It may also be based on scholarship and the use of critical methods in the interest of advancing a taste for literature, art, learning, and science.”

Freedom of expression in the Digital Age: Internet Censorship

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 08 May 2020
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Md Nurul Momen 4  

287 Accesses

Freedom of expression includes freedom to hold opinions and ideas and to receive and impart information without restrictions by state authorities.

Introduction

Internet is regarded as an important issue that shapes free expression in today’s volatile nature of human rights world (Momen 2020 ). In the digital age, authoritarian governments in the world always attempt to undermine political and social movement through the complete shutdown of the Internet or providing partial access to it. It is also found that the restrictions on freedom of expression on the Internet are through surveillance and monitoring the online activities. In response to any kind of political and social movement, authoritarian governments across the border occasionally shut down many websites, along with the arrest of several anti-government bloggers and political activists. However, under the international legal instruments, for instance, Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), denial of the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Ariffin, L. J. (2012). Rais backs Dr M call for curbs to Internet freedom . https://www.malaysia-today.net/2012/06/05/rais-backs-dr-m-call-for-curbs-to-internet-freedom/ . Accessed 10 June 2018.

Arnaudo, D., Alva, A., Wood, P., & Whittington, J. (2013). Political and economic implications of authoritarian control of the internet. In J. Butts & S. Shenoi (Eds.), Critical infrastructure protection VII (IFIP AICT) (Vol. 417, pp. 3–19). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Google Scholar  

Cristiano, F. (2019). Internet access as human right: A dystopian critique from the occupied Palestinian territory. In G. Blouin-Genest, M. C. Doran, & S. Paquerot (Eds.), Human rights as battlefields (Human rights interventions). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91770-2_12 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Diamond, L. (2010). Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy, 21 (3), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0190 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Freedom House. (2019). Freedom on the Net . Washington DC/New York, Retrieved from https://www.freedomonthenet.org/countries-in-detail

Hill, D. T. (2002). East Timor and the Internet: Global political leverage in/on Indonesia. Indonesia, 73 , 25–51.

Kee, J. S. (2012). Bad laws won’t stop cyber crime . https://www.loyarburok.com/2012/05/28/bad-laws-stop-cyber-crime/?doing_wp_cron . Accessed 10 June 2019.

Momen, M. N. (2020). Myth and reality of freedom of expression on the Internet. International Journal of Public Administration, 43 (3), 277–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2019.1628055 .

Nocetti, J. (2015). Contest and conquest: Russia and global Internet governance. International Affairs, 91 (1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12189 .

Randall, J. (1996). Of cracks and crackdown: Five translations of recent Internet postings. Indonesia, 62 , 37–51.

Rodan, G. (1998). The Internet and political control in Singapore. Political Science Quarterly, 113 (1), 63–89.

Shirokanova, A., & Silyutina, O. (2018). Internet regulation: A text-based approach to media coverage. In D. A. Alexandrov et al. (Eds.), Digital Transformation and Global Society (DTGS) 2018 (Communications in computer and information science (CCIS)) (Vol. 858, pp. 181–194). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02843-5_15 .

Ziccardi, G. (2013). Digital activism, internet control, transparency, censorship, surveillance and human rights: An international perspective. In Resistance, liberation technology and human rights in the digital age (Law, governance and technology series) (Vol. 7). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5276-4_6 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Public Administration, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Bangladesh

Md Nurul Momen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md Nurul Momen .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Alberta, Alberta, AB, Canada

Scott Romaniuk

University for Peace, San Jose, Costa Rica

Manish Thapa

Nemzetkozi Tanulmanyok Intezet, Rm 503, Corvinus Univ, Inst of Intl Studies, Budapest, Hungary

Péter Marton

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Momen, M.N. (2019). Freedom of expression in the Digital Age: Internet Censorship. In: Romaniuk, S., Thapa, M., Marton, P. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Global Security Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_31-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74336-3_31-1

Received : 15 March 2018

Accepted : 29 June 2019

Published : 08 May 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-74336-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-74336-3

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Political Science and International Studies Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

  Take 10% OFF— Expires in h m s Use code save10u during checkout.

Chat with us

• Live Chat Talk to a specialist
• Self-service options
• Search FAQs Fast answers, no waiting
• Ultius 101 New client? Click here
• Messenger  

International support numbers

For reference only, subject to Terms and Fair Use policies.

• How it Works

Learn more about us

• Future writers
• Explore further

Ultius Blog

Sample essay on censorship.

Select network

This sample research paper reflects how government leaders and organizations have continued to use censorship in an effort to control people more effectively. The role censorship plays in governing people is truly something one must grasp to understand contemporary international and domestic politics. Whether you are a beginning student or a practicing professional in your field, this issue is important and one you should be as informed on as possible. This particular document is more suited to an introductory level discussion, but Ultius writers are ready and able to write on this subject up to the dissertation level .

Censorship: true governmental power?

Conservative views are a group of beliefs that have not experienced much in the way of change. Through the censorship of modern thought, expression and belief, conservative minds have been able to preserve their noticeably closed minded way of doing things. Censorship dates back as far as the age of antiquity and further with Socrates being one of the first notable figures to perish at its hands . Some have come to view the government as a savior for censoring what they consider wrong, while others see the government as overly authoritative in its attempt to pass judgement upon what is right or acceptable for the masses. While censorship is often viewed as a relatively moralistic venture, throughout history, it has actually been one of the key tools by which governments have maintained their control.

Censorship throughout history

Over the years the fight for censorship has proven to be dangerous for those who oppose it. History has shown that even though the government was created to help people, their views of what they consider "corrupt" or "profane" have frequently been called into question. According to BeaconForFreedom.org:

”Perhaps the most famous censorship in ancient times is that of Socrates, sentenced to drink poison in 399 BC for his corruption of youth and his acknowledgement of unorthodox divinities.”   (Newth).  

Many think that the government hides the truth behind the guise of protecting the innocence of youth, while others believe that the world is safe from the true evils that surrounds them. Some decisions that governments have made have left endless questions about why censorship ever came into existence. While government policies still insist that freedom of expression is an inherent human right, it seems to feel that it can place limitations upon how far this freedom extends. Whether it is music, newspapers, or media, the government will always play a hand in the extent to which free expression can be exercised, though the view of its use in America has changed as time has passed. 

Legal Issues with Censorship

While the censorship of music has cause the greatest stir in modern history, the age of censorship first appeared in print. In early years of the mass marketed press, owners wallowed in defeat if their newspapers were censored, often experiencing a shutdown of their businesses if censorship was employed. In America, the freedoms granted by the 1st amendment to the Constitution are often called into question by censorship. Though many elements of censorship have changed where the free press is involved, not all views of what should be shared is taken lightly. The censorship of the printed word doesn’t just affect newspapers read around the world. High school press papers are well known examples of censorship, due to the perceived "fragility" of young minds. This "preservation of youthful innocence" has long been a shield behind which the supporters of censorship have hidden. The decisions made may not be acceptable or fair to those who oppose them, but the protection of the innocence of youth will always be what is most important for many. 

Hazelwood school district

One example of censorship and the question of academic freedom was in the case of Hazelwood School District vs Kuhlmeier. Students who worked for the school paper at Hazelwood East in 1983 thought that it would be a noble idea to dedicate certain parts of the paper to students who:

• Were HIV positive
• Were pregnant
• Lived in homes affected by divorce

Once the school’s principal, Robert Reynolds, read the proofs of the articles, however, he wanted them removed from the paper. With this decision being made, the students in charge of the paper were outraged, accusing the principal of censorship of freedom of press. Even though the students who were interviewed in the articles were not named, the principal still felt that it was too much of a risk to take in allowing the newspaper be read by other students and teachers. Reynolds feared that the students who were talked about in these articles would be discovered and that it would have been a matter of time before harm came to them.

Need an opinion piece written on this subject? Our team has the skills and time to help you reclaim your schedule .

Censorship in the 21st century

Music has long been a target of censors and continues to be one in the 21st century. For many, censorship represents all that is wrong with the world and that secrets and hidden truths are concealed behind the walls of government. For many parts of the world, the eyes of the people are closed to the secrets carried in their government due to censorship which has been attributed to the concealment of:

• Planned attacks
• Embezzlement

Still other atrocities remain hidden behind the veil of censorship, keeping the public ignorant to them. For some, censorship can either hurt a community or raise its values to higher standards. However, censorship does protect the innocence in situations where safety can be compromised. In the Hazelwood School District case, it is conceivable that protection was needed due to harm that could have come to the students that were discussed in the school paper. The newest target of censorship is understandably the internet. There has long been a cry to the government to impose regulations on content available online .

Censorship may not always be fully understood or appreciated by those it is designed to "protect", but it is sometimes needed for the building of the core values of youth. Like any new policy, law, or rule, there are elements that are not liked or respected. Boundaries will always be tested with censorship, because some believe that no one, particularly the government, should be the judge of what is right and what is wrong beyond established law. Figures of authority will eternally strive to "protect the innocent" that they feel cannot judge or fend for themselves. However, there will always be those who stand in opposition. Certainly, it can be said that there are some things that we probably should not know or see due to its graphic nature and ability to disrupt the emotional well-being of our otherwise happy lives. The question that remains, however, is who gets to decide this?

Giving a speech on this subject? Ultius writers can help you prepare your presentation .

Works Cited

Newth, Mette. The Long History of Censorship . 2010. Norway. < http://www.beaconforfreedom.org/liste.html?tid=415&art_id=475>.

Zeinert, Karen. Free Speech: From Newspapers to Music Lyrics . New Jersey. Enslow, 1995.

Cite This Post

This blog post is provided free of charge and we encourage you to use it for your research and writing. However, we do require that you cite it properly using the citation provided below (in MLA format).

Ultius, Inc. "Sample Essay on Censorship." Ultius Blog . Ultius | Custom Writing and Editing Services, 19 May 2013. Web. < https://www.ultius.com/ultius-blog/entry/sample-essay-on-censorship.html >

Thank you for practicing fair use.

This citation is in MLA format, if you need help with MLA format, click here to follow our citation style guide.

https://www.ultius.com/ultius-blog/entry/sample-essay-on-censorship.html

• Chicago Style

Ultius, Inc. "Sample Essay on Censorship." Ultius | Custom Writing and Editing Services. Ultius Blog, 20 May. 2013. https://www.ultius.com/ultius-blog/entry/sample-essay-on-censorship.html

Copied to clipboard

Click here for more help with MLA citations.

Ultius, Inc. (2013, May 20). Sample Essay on Censorship. Retrieved from Ultius | Custom Writing and Editing Services, https://www.ultius.com/ultius-blog/entry/sample-essay-on-censorship.html

Click here for more help with APA citations.

Ultius, Inc. "Sample Essay on Censorship." Ultius | Custom Writing and Editing Services. May 20, 2013 https://www.ultius.com/ultius-blog/entry/sample-essay-on-censorship.html.

Click here for more help with CMS citations.

Click here for more help with Turabian citations.

Ultius is the trusted provider of content solutions and matches customers with highly qualified writers for sample writing, academic editing, and business writing. 

Tested Daily

Click to Verify

About The Author

This post was written by Ultius.

• Writer Options
• Custom Writing
• Business Documents
• Support Desk
• +1-800-405-2972
• Submit bug report
• A+ BBB Rating!

Ultius is the trusted provider of content solutions for consumers around the world. Connect with great American writers and get 24/7 support.

© 2024 Ultius, Inc.

• Refund & Cancellation Policy

Free Money For College!

Yeah. You read that right —We're giving away free scholarship money! Our next drawing will be held soon.

Our next winner will receive over $500 in funds. Funds can be used for tuition, books, housing, and/or other school expenses. Apply today for your chance to win!

* We will never share your email with third party advertisers or send you spam.

** By providing my email address, I am consenting to reasonable communications from Ultius regarding the promotion.

Past winner

• Name Samantha M.
• From Pepperdine University '22
• Studies Psychology
• Won $2,000.00
• Award SEED Scholarship
• Awarded Sep. 5, 2018

Thanks for filling that out.

Check your inbox for an email about the scholarship and how to apply.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Internet Censorship — The Benefits And Shortcomings Of Internet Censorship Today

The Benefits and Shortcomings of Internet Censorship Today

• Categories: Censorship Internet Censorship

About this sample

Words: 1419 |

Published: Apr 11, 2022

Words: 1419 | Pages: 3 | 8 min read

Works Cited

• Abbasi, M., & Altmann, J. (2017). Measuring self-censorship on social media: A case study of Weibo. Journal of Informetrics, 11(1), 317-332.
• Al-Rawi, A. (2013). Paradoxes of internet censorship: The ambiguity of Facebook’s censorship policy. First Monday, 18(11).
• Dulong de Rosnay, M., & Musiani, F. (Eds.). (2016). The Right to Be Forgotten: Privacy and the Media in the Digital Age. Springer.
• Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Random House.
• MacKinnon, R. (2012). Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle For Internet Freedom. Basic Books.
• Roberts, R. (2014). Censored 2014: Fearless Speech in Fateful Times. Seven Stories Press.
• Runciman, D. (2018). How Democracy Ends. Profile Books.
• Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press.
• Xu, Q., Zhang, Y., & Yang, C. C. (2017). Why do people self-censor on social media? An empirical study of the Chinese case. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(2), 191-207.
• Zittrain, J. (2009). The Future of the Internet—And How to Stop It. Yale University Press.

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

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

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 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

4 pages / 1796 words

2 pages / 684 words

2 pages / 801 words

1 pages / 1084 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 Internet Censorship

The internet has become a communication tool that our society widely depends on for entertainment, office work, domestic jobs, and most importantly for educational research. For example, the internet is critical to the U.S. [...]

It is worth mentioning that when the government starts surveillance on internet activities, the internet might become less attractive. Furthermore, art, culture, innovation, scientific research, and freedom of expression will be [...]

The advent of the internet has revolutionized the way we access information, communicate, and interact with the world. However, with this immense connectivity comes the challenge of balancing the freedom of expression and the [...]

The recorded history of capital punishment on American soil dates back more than 400 years. The first execution of an Englishman, in what is now the United States, was that of Captain George Kendall, which took place in [...]

As of 2015, there are 31 states with the death penalty, plus the federal government and the military. Nebraska was the most recent state to abolish the death penalty. And it was the first traditionally conservative state to do [...]

The debate between those for and against gun control is becoming more and more prominent in the United States. Several gun control activists have problems with the possibility of owning weapons. The solution is simple. The [...]

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

Please wait while we process your request

Writing about Freedom of Speech and Censorship

Academic writing

Essay paper writing

Freedom of speech is an important and inalienable right, which determines the degree of liberation and democracy of the society. Voltaire wrote that people have no freedom without the right to express their thoughts. Now, freedom of speech, which was in oblivion for a long time, tends to rise again.  This fact makes the topic of freedom of speech and the issue of censorship an extremely popular one in colleges and universities. If you want to write a decent censorship and freedom of speech essay, research paper, or even freedom of speech term paper, read this article to find out all the best writing secrets and tips.

Useful tips on how to write quality essays on freedom of speech 

We offer you to get acquainted with this part of the article to find out all the best tips on writing perfect essays about freedom of speech.  •    Decide what type of essay you will work on. This aspect is important as each specific essay type has its features and may even differ in terms of structure. •    Make an outline. It’s an important step in any paper writing because a well-structured plan will help you a lot during the writing process.  •    Develop a strong thesis. Make sure it is brief, clear, and describes your main idea along with the points you will use to support it. •    Research the topic. It’s a good idea to read some credible resources, such as journal articles on the topic, to have a clear understanding of the issue you are going to consider before actually writing about it.  •    Check your spelling and grammar. These little details really make a difference. Even the greatest paper will look unprofessional with a great number of typos or improper grammar. 

Freedom of speech essay topics

Here are some really interesting freedom of speech essay ideas for your consideration:  •    What does freedom of speech mean to me essay •    Pros and cons of freedom of speech essay •    Freedom of speech opinion essay: is it important for you to speak your mind?  •    Freedom of speech in social media essay •    Freedom of press essay •    History of the freedom of speech essay •    Censorship essay  •    Free speech on college campuses essay •    Essay about lack of freedom of speech •    Defamation and freedom of speech essay •    Essay on disadvantages of freedom of speech •    Freedom of speech should be restricted essay •    Freedom of speech and political correctness essay •    Essay on the First Amendment freedom of speech •    Against censorship essay •    Regulations should be put on freedom of speech on social media essay •    Freedom of speech limitations essay •    Censorship persuasive essay: why censorship is dangerous?  •    Freedom of speech argumentative essay: why there should be no censorship?  •    Should freedom of speech be limited essay •    Essay about freedom of speech and the Internet •    The importance of freedom of speech at school essay •    Why freedom of speech is important essay •    Why are there laws limiting the freedom of speech essay •    Should we change laws outlined in the First Amendment essay

Freedom of speech essay outline

Whether you have to write a short essay on freedom of speech or extensive research work on this topic, it will have a very clear structure that consists of the following items: •    Freedom of speech essay introduction. The main goal of the introduction is to demonstrate your position on the question put forward (in the form of thesis or simple argumentation) and to set a rhythm for the whole paper. Before presenting the thesis statement, it is crucial to review basic facts about the topic to get a reader a better understanding of why it is important to research it.  •    Freedom of speech essay thesis. Your position should be very clear so that the readers do not have any doubts about your personal attitude to the problem or the arguments you are going to use to support it. •    The main part. All the important points of your essay should be discussed here in detail. In the first paragraph of the main part, you should use your strongest and most rigorous arguments, while the less obvious examples should follow after it. In order for the reader to form an integral picture of your paper, choose at least 1-2 relevant examples from real-life events that confirm your position. Tie all parts of the text to each other. Remember that you should not write separate sentences: all judgments must follow logically from previous statements. •    Freedom of speech essay conclusion. Despite the fact that the conclusion is at the very end of the paper, do not write it as if you have a new thought in your head: this part should never include any new information. The final paragraph is the last chance to emphasize the depth of your reflections. It is also necessary to restate your thesis mentioned in the introduction. After this, you should draw logical conclusions based on examples and their explanations. After you are done with the outline and the writing, choose a few suitable titles for freedom of speech essay and see which one matches the points you have reviewed best. Find a few freedom of speech essay examples to see how a title may be structured and understand what kind of words you may include to convey the main idea of the paper better.

Freedom of speech research paper topics 

Here are the top 10 topics for your freedom of speech research paper: •    Research paper on media censorship •    Censorship in the USSR •    Censorship in North Korea •    The Charlie Hebdo attack: the flip side of freedom of speech  •    Freedom of speech in the US before the First Amendment  •    Is anonymity possible on the Internet?  •    How important is censorship in today’s world?  •    The Arab Spring •    Media censorship in China •    Gitlow v. New York case

Freedom of speech research paper outline

•    Introduction. Here, you need to develop a strong thesis statement and give a brief introduction to the problem under consideration. Your main task here is to present the topic of your paper and emphasize its importance. If necessary, justify why you have decided to focus on this specific topic instead of a variety of others. •    Main part. In this part, you have to make a literature review, presenting the ideas of the outstanding researchers. Show how you have searched for the material, why you have chosen specific sources to consider, and what you have found in them. You may compare and contrast the ideas of different researchers and explain the differences in their findings if any.  •    Conclusion. In the final section, you need to recap the review made in the body of the text and reemphasize the importance of the issue you considered in the paper. You also have to restate your thesis here. 

Interesting facts for freedom of speech and censorship research papers and essays

The topic of freedom of speech and censorship is vast and versatile, and, sometimes, it is easy to get lost among interesting ideas. That is why we have decided to collect the most interesting historical facts concerning this topic: •    The survey conducted in 2002 in the USA by the Freedom Forum Center for First Amendment showed that 42% of the respondents thought that too much freedom was given to the US media.  •    More than 2/3 of the US citizens believe that freedom of speech is crucial, even if people who use it only have something offensive to say. •    In China, there is a censorship police that monitors people activities and punishes those who say something unpleasant about the government. •    In the 50’s, the word “pregnant” was censored by the media as it was considered improper. •    Turkey is the first in the list of countries when it comes to the number of jailed journalists. •    In Cuba, Internet access is heavily monitored and, as it is very expensive, only ¼ people actually use Internet actively on a daily basis. •    Government in Iran blocks about 40% of the content on the Web for their citizens.

Historical overview for censorship and freedom of speech college essay or research paper 

Once you are assigned to write a freedom of speech and censorship essay or a research paper, it is crucial that you choose what specific idea to focus on. In order to do it, we suggest that you learn more about the history of the subject in question and see if any events prompt you to choose a certain topic to research.

Church censorship

The problem of access to information and control over it became relevant after the collapse of the slave society and growth of the movement against the tyranny of the Roman emperors, as well as the subsequent rise of the Christian church. Today, we would say that people of those times tried to establish social justice.  The Church carried out noble activities at that time, defended the poor, destitute, and oppressed people. Nevertheless, it sought to protect the Bible from distortion to preserve the canonical text. And, accordingly, a framework was introduced for those ideas that people were allowed to preach. When there were a lot of gods, the problem of censorship and access to certain texts did not exist. When one universally recognized Creator appeared, Christianity began to claim the role of the dominant religion, standing against the old gods and proclaiming that there is only one God who has a great plan for each of its creatures. 

State and university censorship 

At the same time, various monarchies emerged in Europe. The first of them arose in France, Spain, and England. In Germany and Italy, the situation was more complicated, as there were many different states in these countries. Spiritual limitations were based on censorship enforced by the state represented by monarchs. First, the functions of censorship were placed on the church, and then on universities. The latter were a kind of intermediary link between the government and the church in the implementation of censorship. The first universities arose on the basis of theological research centers. For example, the Sorbonne was located in the temple, where the local teachers studied theology. Therefore, when the French kings entrusted control over the sacred books to the professors, they knew that these people were faithful Catholics acting within the church laws.

Inquisition

Censorship was initially created with an intent to preserve the original texts. Later, it turned into a means of persecuting dissenters. People began to divide into those who had the right to censor (kings and priests) and those who had to obey their decisions. During the development of censorship, the institution of the Inquisition was established. People were subjected to double punishment for having another point of view. Firstly, their books were taken away and destroyed. Secondly, citizens accused of heresy were burned.

Reformation and Renaissance

The Protestant Church opposed the Inquisition and censorship. Its representatives, who appreciated Christian ideals, began to advocate for freedom of speech. To a certain extent, Luther and some other leaders of the Reformation fought for liberation from the hierarchical structure and subordination to authority. The idea of freedom of speech was reinforced by philosophical concepts born in the Renaissance when questions of humanism and human rights became extremely relevant. Further development of the human rights concept is associated with the activities of English and French philosophers: Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Diderot, and others. They put forward a number of important thoughts that changed the idea of what the world should be like.  For example, the concept of civil society was created. The division of powers into administrative, governmental, legislative, and judicial was proposed by Montesquieu. And, within the framework of these philosophical doctrines, a new understanding of humanism has emerged. 

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *

Try it now!

Calculate your price

Number of pages:

Order an essay!

Fill out the order form

Make a secure payment

Receive your order by email

Argumentative Essay Guidelines

What is argumentative essay? What should be written there? What arguments should be provided and why? These and many other questions usually arise in students&rsquo; minds when they are given the…

23rd May 2017

Research paper writing

Research Paper Topics

The challenge of the research paper writing lies in the fact that you have to apply both theoretical knowledge and practical skills, and what is more, make your own scientific contribution. But the…

2nd Oct 2018

Compare And Contrast Essay Topics

Many students have surely written compare and contrast essays during their studies. Most of the time, our teachers gave us a task with the specific instructions to follow, so it was not a very…

4th Sep 2018

Get your project done perfectly

Professional writing service

Reset password

We’ve sent you an email containing a link that will allow you to reset your password for the next 24 hours.

Please check your spam folder if the email doesn’t appear within a few minutes.

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies

Cinema and Media Studies

• Communication
• Criminology
• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Censorship

Introduction, anthologies and overviews.

• Theorizing Censorship
• Early Cinema and Censorship
• The Hays Office and the Production Code
• Genre, the Individual Film, and Censorship
• Colonial Censorship
• Hollywood’s Blacklist
• Pressure Groups
• Sexual Politics
• State Censors
• War and Censorship
• Hollywood and the World
• Middle East
• Southeast Asia
• Contemporary Censorship Practices

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Animation and the Animated Film
• Audiences and Moviegoing Cultures
• Billy Wilder
• British Cinema
• Cuban Cinema
• David Cronenberg
• Erich Von Stroheim
• Exploitation Film
• Gangster Films
• History of Television
• Hollywood and Politics
• Holocaust Cinema
• Japanese Cinema
• Márta Mészáros
• Nagisa Oshima
• Natalie Wood
• New Media Policy
• Orson Welles
• Oscar Micheaux
• Pornography
• Preston Sturges
• Television Regulation
• The Birth of a Nation
• The Films of Andy Warhol
• The Twilight Zone
• Turkish Cinema
• Violence and Cinema
• Women and Film

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Superhero Films
• Wim Wenders
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Censorship by Lee Grieveson LAST REVIEWED: 28 October 2011 LAST MODIFIED: 28 October 2011 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199791286-0015

All social orders make decisions about what facts, ideas, and representations can safely appear in public. Liberal polities from the 18th century came to value “free speech” and, accordingly, limited prior restraint of materials. However, these freedoms are limited. These limits have been tested particularly by the rise of popular newspapers in the mid-19th century and the mass distribution of moving images from the late 19th century. Obscenity, for example, is not protected speech. Governments at times of “crisis” have extended their regulatory authority to protect official “truths,” when governments argue that “national security” mandates stricter control of information. Authoritarian and ideological regimes have historically exerted more direct control over speech and media (broadly, respectively, preventing expressions of discontent and shaping ideology). The place of moving image media in these historical and political contexts has been varied. Liberal polities have frequently innovated a mixture of government censorship and industrial self-regulation. The trend has been toward the latter, and media industries establish their own regulatory boards to ensure their products do not cross lines delineated variously by the state, church, and other influential organizations. Censorship codes thus become known to media-makers, and hence internal to textual construction, and so function as a productive force. Self-regulation aims to ensure greater profitability for the usually heavily capitalized media industries, fending off more stringent state censorship and/or regulation of other economic aspects of media industries. This is a form of market censorship and a privatization of regulation; media industries have often used regulatory authority to help generate monopoly power, to limit access to markets, and to control legal agreements, such as those for patents and intellectual property. Authoritarian and ideological regimes maintain closer control, mostly because they don’t trust market censorship. Across all regimes, advocates of censorship usually insist that screen representations affect attitudes and conduct more than other forms of media, influencing viewers to act in socially proscribed ways. The viewer affected badly by screen representation is regarded as peculiarly vulnerable and as potentially dangerous to the social order. Censorship debates often focus on children, although the effects of screen representations on other groups—such as women, immigrants, colonized populations, or working class audiences—have also been a concern. Policing the borders of expression is centrally a question of power: censors try to encourage adherence to various systems of values and marginalize competing voices. Debates about media censorship are frequently highly charged negotiations over discursive practices in a culture, marking boundaries that are always closely tied to the establishment and maintenance of forms of social, moral, and political order.

The study of censorship blossomed in the mid-1960s, amidst broader cultural and political changes. In the United States, this occurred at the same time that the long-running, self-regulatory Production Code was winding down to be replaced by a Ratings Code in 1968 that is still in use. Carmen 1966 surveys legal decisions up to that point in the United States, Randall 1968 looks closely at the functioning of city and state boards in the United States, while Hunnings 1967 offers a more comparative study (one of the few in studies on censorship, and this is something of a lacuna in current scholarship). The study of legal decisions in the United States is pursued in more recent scholarship: Jowett 1990 offers an excellent overview, DeGrazia and Newman 1982 gives details of a number of court cases (the former was a lawyer actively involved in censorship cases), and Wittern-Keller 2008 helpfully examines the long history of the legal record, using the files of state censors. The broader contexts for battles over the cinema and the functioning of self-regulatory bodies are addressed in two excellent collections of essays: Bernstein 1999 focuses on Hollywood before the 1968 Ratings Code went into effect, and Couvares 2006 , an essential collection, covers a longer history, beginning with the emergence of cinema and culminating with the so-called culture wars of the 1980s.

Bernstein, Matthew, ed. Controlling Hollywood: Censorship and Regulation in the Studio Era . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1999.

Very useful collection that carefully gathers together a number of previously published essays, combining them with two newly commissioned pieces, to examine movie censorship in the United States from the Supreme Court’s important 1915 decision on the legitimacy of state censorship to the emergence of the Ratings Code in 1968.

Carmen, Ira H.. Movies, Censorship and the Law . Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966.

Account of significant court cases in the United States and the impact of these on the existence and functioning of various city and state censor boards operative in the 1960s.

Couvares, Francis G., ed. Movie Censorship and American Culture . 2d ed. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2006.

Couvares insightfully situates movie censorship as a central node within broader “culture wars”—battles about defining cultural value and deciding what is legitimate to see and hear—that are connected to questions of hegemony and power. Essays examine examples from the United States across the 20th century and are the best point of entry for undergraduate and graduate students.

DeGrazia, Edward, and Roger K. Newman. Banned Films: Movies, Censors, and the First Amendment . New York: R. R. Bowker, 1982.

Overview of movie censorship that also includes a useful detailed account of 122 court cases involving the censorship of films in the United States from 1908 to 1981.

Hunnings, Neville March. Film Censors and the Law . London: Allen and Unwin, 1967.

The material here on the emergence and functioning of censorship in Britain is useful, but the book is most valuable for the chapters on the history and (then) contemporary functioning of censorship in other countries, including the United States, India, Canada, Australia, Denmark, France, and Soviet Russia.

Jowett, Garth. “Moral Responsibility and Commercial Entertainment: Social Control in the United States Film Industry, 1907–1968.” Historical Journal of Film, Radio, and Television 10.1 (1990): 3–31.

DOI: 10.1080/01439689000260011

Good overview of the censorship situation in the United States until the late 1960s by a significant media historian.

Randall, Richard. The Censorship of the Movies: The Social and Political Control of a Mass Medium . Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1968.

Randall’s book delineates the legal contexts and the procedures of state and city prior restraint censorship, as well as more informal mechanisms, as they operated in the 1960s. Written amidst the broad social, cultural, and political changes of the 1960s, the book was published the same year the Ratings Code went into effect.

Wittern-Keller, Laura. Freedom of the Screen: Legal Challenges to State Film Censorship, 1915–1981 . Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2008.

Wittern-Keller outlines the judicial attitudes toward film censorship and the responses by individuals and the film industry as they sought to challenge legal restrictions.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Cinema and Media Studies »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• 2001: A Space Odyssey
• À bout de souffle
• Accounting, Motion Picture
• Action Cinema
• Advertising and Promotion
• African American Cinema
• African American Stars
• African Cinema
• AIDS in Film and Television
• Akerman, Chantal
• Allen, Woody
• Almodóvar, Pedro
• Altman, Robert
• American Cinema, 1895-1915
• American Cinema, 1939-1975
• American Cinema, 1976 to Present
• American Independent Cinema
• American Independent Cinema, Producers
• American Public Broadcasting
• Anderson, Wes
• Animals in Film and Media
• Arbuckle, Roscoe
• Architecture and Cinema
• Argentine Cinema
• Aronofsky, Darren
• Arzner, Dorothy
• Asian American Cinema
• Asian Television
• Astaire, Fred and Rogers, Ginger
• Australian Cinema
• Authorship, Television
• Avant-Garde and Experimental Film
• Bachchan, Amitabh
• Battle of Algiers, The
• Battleship Potemkin, The
• Bazin, André
• Bergman, Ingmar
• Bernstein, Elmer
• Bertolucci, Bernardo
• Bigelow, Kathryn
• Birth of a Nation, The
• Blade Runner
• Blockbusters
• Bong, Joon Ho
• Brakhage, Stan
• Brando, Marlon
• Brazilian Cinema
• Breaking Bad
• Bresson, Robert
• Broadcasting, Australian
• Buffy the Vampire Slayer
• Burnett, Charles
• Buñuel, Luis
• Cameron, James
• Campion, Jane
• Canadian Cinema
• Capra, Frank
• Carpenter, John
• Cassavetes, John
• Cavell, Stanley
• Chahine, Youssef
• Chan, Jackie
• Chaplin, Charles
• Children in Film
• Chinese Cinema
• Cinecittà Studios
• Cinema and Media Industries, Creative Labor in
• Cinema and the Visual Arts
• Cinematography and Cinematographers
• Citizen Kane
• City in Film, The
• Cocteau, Jean
• Coen Brothers, The
• Colonial Educational Film
• Comedy, Film
• Comedy, Television
• Comics, Film, and Media
• Computer-Generated Imagery (CGI)
• Copland, Aaron
• Coppola, Francis Ford
• Copyright and Piracy
• Corman, Roger
• Costume and Fashion
• Cronenberg, David
• Cult Cinema
• Dance and Film
• de Oliveira, Manoel
• Dean, James
• Deleuze, Gilles
• Denis, Claire
• Deren, Maya
• Design, Art, Set, and Production
• Detective Films
• Dietrich, Marlene
• Digital Media and Convergence Culture
• Disney, Walt
• Documentary Film
• Downton Abbey
• Dr. Strangelove
• Dreyer, Carl Theodor
• Eastern European Television
• Eastwood, Clint
• Eisenstein, Sergei
• Elfman, Danny
• Ethnographic Film
• European Television
• Exhibition and Distribution
• Fairbanks, Douglas
• Fan Studies
• Fellini, Federico
• Film Aesthetics
• Film and Literature
• Film Guilds and Unions
• Film, Historical
• Film Preservation and Restoration
• Film Theory and Criticism, Science Fiction
• Film Theory Before 1945
• Film Theory, Psychoanalytic
• Finance Film, The
• French Cinema
• Game of Thrones
• Gance, Abel
• Garbo, Greta
• Garland, Judy
• German Cinema
• Gilliam, Terry
• Global Television Industry
• Godard, Jean-Luc
• Godfather Trilogy, The
• Golden Girls, The
• Greek Cinema
• Griffith, D.W.
• Hammett, Dashiell
• Haneke, Michael
• Hawks, Howard
• Haynes, Todd
• Hepburn, Katharine
• Herrmann, Bernard
• Herzog, Werner
• Hindi Cinema, Popular
• Hitchcock, Alfred
• Hollywood Studios
• Hong Kong Cinema
• Horror-Comedy
• Hsiao-Hsien, Hou
• Hungarian Cinema
• Icelandic Cinema
• Immigration and Cinema
• Indigenous Media
• Industrial, Educational, and Instructional Television and ...
• Invasion of the Body Snatchers
• Iranian Cinema
• Irish Cinema
• Israeli Cinema
• It Happened One Night
• Italian Americans in Cinema and Media
• Italian Cinema
• Jazz Singer, The
• Jews in American Cinema and Media
• Keaton, Buster
• Kitano, Takeshi
• Korean Cinema
• Kracauer, Siegfried
• Kubrick, Stanley
• Lang, Fritz
• Latin American Cinema
• Latina/o Americans in Film and Television
• Lee, Chang-dong
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) Cin...
• Lord of the Rings Trilogy, The
• Los Angeles and Cinema
• Lubitsch, Ernst
• Lumet, Sidney
• Lupino, Ida
• Lynch, David
• Marker, Chris
• Martel, Lucrecia
• Masculinity in Film
• Media, Community
• Media Ecology
• Memory and the Flashback in Cinema
• Metz, Christian
• Mexican Cinema
• Micheaux, Oscar
• Ming-liang, Tsai
• Minnelli, Vincente
• Miyazaki, Hayao
• Méliès, Georges
• Modernism and Film
• Monroe, Marilyn
• Mészáros, Márta
• Music and Cinema, Classical Hollywood
• Music and Cinema, Global Practices
• Music, Television
• Music Video
• Musicals on Television
• Native Americans
• New Media Art
• New Media Theory
• New York City and Cinema
• New Zealand Cinema
• Opera and Film
• Ophuls, Max
• Orphan Films
• Oshima, Nagisa
• Ozu, Yasujiro
• Panh, Rithy
• Pasolini, Pier Paolo
• Passion of Joan of Arc, The
• Peckinpah, Sam
• Philosophy and Film
• Photography and Cinema
• Pickford, Mary
• Planet of the Apes
• Poems, Novels, and Plays About Film
• Poitier, Sidney
• Polanski, Roman
• Polish Cinema
• Politics, Hollywood and
• Pop, Blues, and Jazz in Film
• Postcolonial Theory in Film
• Potter, Sally
• Prime Time Drama
• Queer Television
• Queer Theory
• Race and Cinema
• Radio and Sound Studies
• Ray, Nicholas
• Ray, Satyajit
• Reality Television
• Reenactment in Cinema and Media
• Regulation, Television
• Religion and Film
• Remakes, Sequels and Prequels
• Renoir, Jean
• Resnais, Alain
• Romanian Cinema
• Romantic Comedy, American
• Rossellini, Roberto
• Russian Cinema
• Saturday Night Live
• Scandinavian Cinema
• Scorsese, Martin
• Scott, Ridley
• Searchers, The
• Sennett, Mack
• Sesame Street
• Shakespeare on Film
• Silent Film
• Simpsons, The
• Singin' in the Rain
• Sirk, Douglas
• Soap Operas
• Social Class
• Social Media
• Social Problem Films
• Soderbergh, Steven
• Sound Design, Film
• Sound, Film
• Spanish Cinema
• Spanish-Language Television
• Spielberg, Steven
• Sports and Media
• Sports in Film
• Stand-Up Comedians
• Stop-Motion Animation
• Streaming Television
• Sturges, Preston
• Surrealism and Film
• Taiwanese Cinema
• Tarantino, Quentin
• Tarkovsky, Andrei
• Tati, Jacques
• Television Audiences
• Television Celebrity
• Television, History of
• Television Industry, American
• Theater and Film
• Theory, Cognitive Film
• Theory, Critical Media
• Theory, Feminist Film
• Theory, Film
• Theory, Trauma
• Touch of Evil
• Transnational and Diasporic Cinema
• Trinh, T. Minh-ha
• Truffaut, François
• Twilight Zone, The
• Varda, Agnès
• Vertov, Dziga
• Video and Computer Games
• Video Installation
• Virtual Reality
• Visconti, Luchino
• Von Sternberg, Josef
• Von Stroheim, Erich
• von Trier, Lars
• Warhol, The Films of Andy
• Waters, John
• Wayne, John
• Weerasethakul, Apichatpong
• Weir, Peter
• Welles, Orson
• Whedon, Joss
• Wilder, Billy
• Williams, John
• Wiseman, Frederick
• Wizard of Oz, The
• Women and the Silent Screen
• Wong, Anna May
• Wong, Kar-wai
• Wood, Natalie
• Yang, Edward
• Yimou, Zhang
• Yugoslav and Post-Yugoslav Cinema
• Zinnemann, Fred
• Zombies in Cinema and Media
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [91.193.111.216]
• 91.193.111.216