Censorship as a controversial issue: examining arguments and counterarguments

Censorship

Looks at the history of the U.S.A. And the stand they have taken for long on the issue of censorship and the general intention of censorship from the historical times.

Gives details on censorship and examples where it has been used and created wide controversy. The body also gives the response by the government and the responsible agencies to issues to do with censorship. It also gives the responsibility of the government is ensuring censorship is instilled to protect citizens such as the children.

Wraps up the hitherto arguments and points to the children as the central figures that should be considered when maters to do with censorship are being discussed.

The United States of America is known the world over as a democratic country where every citizen is guaranteed of freedom of speech. There have been emotive debates regarding whether censorship laws should be institutionalized in a country like the U.S. whose constitution allows for freedom of speech. This essay seeks to illuminate why it is fundamental to have censorship laws in a democracy like the United States whose constitution engenders freedom of speech as reflected in the First Amendment. The essay will henceforth respond to divergent views fielded by the opponents of censorship by providing evidence.

Body

Censorship is not something new to the citizens of the United States. Think of FCC vs. Pacifica Foundation. The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) issued a sanction on a radio station which was running George Carlin's material which was deemed unacceptable to certain audiences. When Pacifica applied to Supreme Court that this be upheld, the Supreme Court; however, ruled 5 to 4 in favor of Federal Communication Commission. From there on FCC was given a mandate to censor that which they deemed indecent or obscene. Many pertinent questions were henceforth raised. Was the man at liberty to switch to another channel if he felt that the material that was aired was indecent? Is it in order for a government agency to regulate what people see or hear?

The government has a responsibility to determine what we see or hear. Because children are not legally competent to determine the content that is appropriate for viewing or listening to, it is the responsibility of the government to insulate children against exposure to coarse material that is injurious to their holistic development. Opponents of censorship have been quick to assert that the advent of child blocks and parental control puts parents in a position to block out what is unsuitable for their children. They have gone further to advance that parents can teach their children proper manners and educate them on words and phrases that are inappropriate.

However, proponents of this school of thought have failed to realize that some children have a way of walking around the rules set out for them by their parents. They also assume that parents will always be around their kids to facilitate the blocking and the parental controls. With the advent of electronic gadgets these children, without censorship laws in place, will stray into the internet and access pornographic material. Opponents of censorship have vilified the government for assuming that they don't have capacity to choose what they want to watch and hear. They have even pointed at the provisions of the First Amendment to the constitution that guarantees the citizens the freedom of speech arguing that censorship constricts creative expression. They have; however, failed to appreciate that the rights that we enjoy come with responsibilities. It is very possible that one can entertain without being obscene.