Are there cases where it is beneficial for the government to censor television and other media? The answer is blatantly yes. If there was a television program that was hideously racist, called for harm against a specific group of individual or something similarly vile it would be a clear harm to society. The government should intervene in these cases to protect the rights of those at risk of harm or whom are actively being harmed.
I am one of the few people who has had the ability to see many of the pictures of recent shootings not released to the public. The public should not see them, and I am glad they were censored. Showing of overly graphic photos and videos is unnecessary, the fact that elementary school children were shot to death is a difficult enough reality to endure, we (the public) do not need to see pictures of five year olds with their heads blown off. Though there are many issues I believe the government should not be able to censor, such as complaints against the government, there are certain topics that need to be censored for the good of society.
Of course there needs to be some censorship, even in America.
Because there are children, there has to be censorship of TV, movies, etc. During certain hours of the day.
Children do not need to watch a pornography or extreme violence on TV, which is why programs rated “R” are using not shown during the day, but late at night. It is the parent’s responsibility to make sure their kids don’t watch it in the evenings.
What is the FCC’s Responsibility?
The FCC, however, does have enforcement responsibilities in certain limited instances. For example, the Courts have said that indecent material is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution and cannot be banned entirely. It may be restricted, however, in order to avoid its broadcast when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. Between 6 A.M. And 10 P.M. (when there is the greatest likelihood that children may be watching,) airing indecent material is prohibited by FCC rules. Broadcasters are required to schedule their programming accordingly or face enforcement action. Similarly, the Commission has stated that profane material is prohibited between 6 A.M. And 10 P.M.
Finally, the courts have ruled that obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. For more information about these rules visit the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau website or see our consumer guide.
I am assuming that anonymous’s comment about personal responsibility and discretion was directed at adults and not children.
America is a very advance and we have had censorship for the purpose of protecting minors for over a century.
I am not sure how you force discretion on anyone. There are many laws in society that limit your choices, e.G., breaking the speed limit. You have discretion in whether you want to break those laws.
You can't go out in a public place and start swearing at everyone and saying I want to form an army to overthrow the US government. There are laws against disturbing the peace, and treason.
And, freedom of speech does not apply at your work place (i.E., your employer can fire you for saying anything that is against company policy) or at websites, like debate.Org, which can have terms of agreements that limit how you say whatever you say or in retail department stores. The retail store can have you thrown out of the store for opening your mouth too loudly about anything they want if you are creating a disturbance.
Besides that, ideas should never be censored in any country that isn't a totalitarian cesspit. I think a lot of countries have subtle ways of censoring television and media, maybe not direct censoring but promoting some ideas over others. There is almost never a government run campaign or advertisement that promotes thinking on both sides of the argument; it's always 'this is right because of this'.
Messages presented through media, in this day and age, are truly foul. Not because of the fact that swearing is only saying 'bad words' or because inappropriate content can expose unwanted truths to innocent people; but because of their uses, their meanings and how heavily they intoxicate the minds of teenagers.
As technology is becoming such a demanding part of our lives, and especially that of teenagers, an individual must consider the risks of including foul content. It promotes verbal and physical arrogance in an extremely strong manner. Consequently, teenagers are picking it up subconsciously and are ultimately not able to correctly decide on in which situation such can be acceptable. To brainwash the minds of such young people can be a certain sign of an unsuccessful future.
Additionally, foul content is truly unacceptable for individuals growing up with certain ethnic values. It must be necessary for the government to consider the importance of presenting appraisable content which will not condescend the values of viewers (unless, and if only, they want World War 111). Respect is a key to success, and it is imperative that the government builds its trust foundation by censorship.
Censorship is compulsory for such degrading media. It will put arrogance to a halt in teenagers and will prove to be appreciated by a crowd with different ethnic values to our own. It is truly advised that the government considers such substantial benefits that come from carrying out censorship in media.
In my office every day I see children anxious, scared, hypersexualized, and even traumatized partially from things they are seeing, hearing and experiencing on various media including TV, movies and the internet. Kids are much more sensitive little beings than most people realize. For proper development they must feel safe. No child should have free access to pornography on the internet or TV. No child should see adults on TV "having sex," be exposed to extreme violence, or hear extremel language, for the same reason as a society we know it's inappropriate and harmful to expose them to these things in real life. Saying they will probably hear or see it elsewhere is not a valid reason to do the wrong thing, and is abandoning our responsibility as adults to protect children and allow for their healthy development. Those who have been abused, in particular, feel triggered and even threatened by unwanted exposure to sexualized shows and commercials (Example: Man to his food: Mmmm..Mmm...You're driving me crazy. You naughty little...(spank). (Male boss: Did you just spank your food? Nice!!" Tagline: X Brand: Food you want to fork.), Is this what we've come to? This commercial is supposed to be "funny" because of course it makes you think of the word FXXX, and this is really what we're supposed to say to women, them being only objects for men's satisfaction and all. Is this funny or appropriate to anyone? Would you like your 6-year-old saying, "Look, I'm spanking my food...You naughty little thing....Mmmm" to his/her teachers or to you? Kids repeat what they hear and see. Ask any teacher in a public school, any police officer, any family court representative, anyone in child protective services, and they will tell you the impact inappropriate media is having on children. Yes, there are many other factors negatively affecting kids, but in my opinion inappropriate media plays a not insignificant part, and putting sensible limits on what kids are exposed to is better for them, for society, and for all of our futures.
Imagine you and your child sitting down watching a movie and then bad words come up he is going to say them like mad plus, studies show that children will repeat any word they hear be it in the house, cinema or adverts. I strongly suggest that ALL movies should censor their bad words unless the age is above 16.
Because . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Because . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Because . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Violence and sex exist with or without media. Ask any third world or pre-historic society. Why would it be thought that media would be a prime influence? Will I say that people may conjure ideas up from the media in front of them....Yes, of course...But does censorship truly serve as the solution? No, I think it goes down to the parents, the education system and the society's crime & punishment system as a whole. Censorship is a band-aid solution.
Besides, when it comes to language, when they "censor" over a word and it's so obvious...In my view, it draws more attention to the obscenity than less. And people fill in the blanks so easily it's useless.
Here's just one pro and con discussion on censorship: http://suite101.Com/article/a-look-at-the-pros-and-cons-of-censorship-a270268
Try to think about it. What would censorship accomplish? Children wouldn't be able to see nudity? Oh yeah, it's not like that kind of stuff is on the internet or anything. Children might hear swear words? If they listen real carefully to when mom and dad fight, they can hear words much worse than "stupid face". The fact that the government wants to censor TV for kids who are gonna see this kind of thing everywhere else is ridiculous.
I believe that as citizens, with free speech, should be able to watch regular TV without censorship. Censorship ruins some of the shows and songs we hear as a country. There are also other options that are able to be used today such as the V-Chip. Giving Americans the choice is what this country was founded on, and simple words we use everyday should not be an exception, especially federally.
People require exposure to the words that we are not supposed to say as if they don't then there can be serious consequences! Take an example, Child A hears a song on the radio and it has a bad word in it, but he has no exposure to swearing so he goes to school the next day using it to offend teachers and classmates alike, and ultimately he gets in trouble. Child B heard the same song and he too hears that word and has had some exposure to swearing and he knows not to use it. Which child would you prefer to be the parent of? I thank you for your time.
People say that kids need to be more active. So they instead watch TV. There is no swearing. Now when I was a kid and I went outside, it was shocking to actually hear a swear word. What advantage does that give you? Yes, they should censor nudity, but swear words? Really?
I believe that no matter what sex and violence are everywhere and that censoring language from a movie doesn't draws more attention to the language.It makes you fill in the blanks. I believe the government shouldn't control what we see or hear.Its the parents job to educate their children about things like sex and violence because they will find out about it eventually anyways.Censoring language takes away the effect the movie has.
No, I do no think that it is the role of the government to be censoring television or other media. Both TV and other media are protected under the first amendment and free speech, and the government just has to go along with whatever is put out there whether they like it or not.
We should do what England does. After a certain time, then allow television to be uncensored. Still, I don't think the government should be able to censor what is said and heard on tv. Also, ii think it's up to parents on what they want their children to see and hear. Honestly, whats available on the internet is far worse than what is said/seen on tv.
I think that we should all have a chance to watch/see or hear what we want to hear. Our parents should decide what we do not the government. If we want to see a film which is out of our age group then thats not the governments choice its ours.
We should have the right to watch whatever we want to. If people don't like it they
don't have to watch/read/see it. Censorship should be banned. It compromises our entertainment. I'm tired of having to turn on the radio and having to hear my favorite songs censored. We have rights!!!