Why Should Banned Books Be Banned

Why Should Banned Books Be Banned
Books are the open door to a world full of imagination and no impossibles. When an individual opens a book, it opens its mind into someones else
point of view and the world that they take it to. New worlds are always great creations, but some authors prefer to focus on society's issues , and that
is where banned books start. Since readers come from all ages and all backgrounds , some book topics are set in controversy , whether it is right to
touch those points or if it is an act to attack certain groups or beliefs. Banned books don't always referred to certain ethnic groups , they can also touch
themes like humans ideology and humans nature , in which many sensitive readers bring an argument against and disagree with the publishment of the
volume. ВЁLord of the FliesВЁ by William Golding is a specific book banned for the sensitive and direct attack against the human nature and " the
pro–slavery ideology"(Lombardi). In the book , children ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Publishers have then stated arguments against the clear statement between censorship and sensitivity. They declared there is two different states that
involves the prohibition of a book, that might not be funded by the right reasons. ВЁMany are turning to sensitivity readers, who provide feedback on
issues like race, religion, gender, sexuality, chronic illness and physical disabilities. The role that readers play in shaping children's books has become a
flashpoint in a fractious debate about diversity, cultural appropriation and representation, with some arguing that the reliance on sensitivity readers
amounts to censorship.ВЁ says The New York Times. Huitron
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Debate of Censorship
The United States Bill of Rights guarantees its citizens the freedom of expression, but how far does that freedom extend? Does the right to express
yourself include the right to observe the expressions of others? According to pro–censorship view holders, it does not. But to those who feel strongly
against censorship, the freedom of information, or the "right to know," should be an absolute right granted to the American public. Censoring material
is the responsibility of the individual, not the institution itself, and certainly not the job of a separate institution. Also, the definition of what is
censor–worthy is by no means clear. Exercising the freedom of speech has two sides: the speaker and the listener. Censorship is unfair ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
In some places, censored material printed in periodicals is simply marked over with a black line, but in America we sometimes do not know that
information is being withheld (Thom). This practice of censored censorship is unethical and unconstitutional. If we don't know what is being
censored, can't we at least know that something is being censored? The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) has certain standards for
material to be considered as profane, indecent, or obscene ("Obscene, Indecent"). Unfortunately, not everything can be fit into these cookie cutter
categories, and sometimes an object of controversy overlaps into two or more of these classifications. These requirements are tested against what is
considered to be an "average person," but who is this mythical, completely normal individual who decides what is offensive and what is acceptable
("Obscene, Indecent")? Most of the time, the parameters for censorship are not compared to the views of John Doe, but to an impressionable child.
In fact, the FCC only prohibits "profane" and "indecent" broadcasts between the hours of 6a.m. and 10p.m., when a child is less likely to be listening
("Obscene, Indecent"). The FCC also upholds double standards. In recent years, popular "shock jock" Howard Stern was removed from six stations
that previously broadcast his show because of his sexual references that

Censorship Is The Control And Suppression Of Ideas And...
The simplest definition of censorship is the control or suppression of ideas and information released within a society. In the early 20th century,
censorship was achieved for the purpose of altering offensive or objectionable information that may have brought negative attention to government or a
political figure. However in recent times censorship has taken a more iron–fisted approached with suppressing information and it can be argued that
nations across the world are stripping away our freedom of speech through the internet. This has become a pressing issue throughout different
communities around the world and it has divided content creators and internet surfacers alike. Censorship has become such a talked about topic that
news outlets such as The Washington Times and Huffington Post have taken a stance on the matter. Washington times took a biased stance posting an
article titled "Blankly, we need censorship" while Huffington Post takes a more unbiased approach covering both sides of the argument. Finding
multiple perspectives on the same issue is key when analyzing different news stories and it is important that one is able to see what information may
be biased or not when taking it in. The rationales for censorship has always been up to to discretion by whoever has control of the information.
Censors usually target material that may be found indecent or obscene by an audience, however some block material that could be seen as seditious or
even treasonous. This is

SOPA: A Righteous Cause or a Piracy Crusade? Essay
SOPA: A Righteous Cause or a Piracy Crusade? To better understand the act, one needs to first examine what "SOPA" is and means. First and
foremost, SOPA is the Stop Online Piracy Act. This act is essentially an extension of another bill that was sent through shortly before it. The name of
this bill is the PROTECT IP act, which stands for Protecting Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property. Both these names
are essentially very fancy names for an anti–theft law to protect the intellectual property of movie, music and other industries alike. From this, the
logical questions one would come to is; what does this bill do? What is beneficial about it? What is harmful about it? How would it effect me and my
daily... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As it is common with any topic as controversial as the censorship of the entire internet, it has drawn a lot of big names on both sides of the fence.
On one side of the fence are have the people who are for the bill; this includes many big music and movie companies who say that they are losing
billions due to the theft of their intellectual property through rogue sites such as "thepiratebay.org". On the other side of the bill, there are many of the
big internet companies of which are some of the greatest innovators of our time; amongst the companies taking up the opposition you have big names
like Google, Facebook, and Twitter. All of these companies are taking up the stance that the new act is unconstitutional and would facilitate the
government to be able to censor the flow of information, which is contrary to the First Amendment of the Constitution. Both sides of the debate have
a very effective argument and only time will tell which side will win. Now that we know what the act does we must then look into the pros of the
issue. The most viable benefit of this bill is the return of money to the companies that are being ravaged by the ongoing growth of internet piracy. It is
estimated that these rogue sites "have 53 billion hits per year, robbing the industries that create them of billions of dollars"(Congressional Digest). In
addition to that, "The Chamber of Commerce estimates that U.S. companies lose

Arguments Against Censorship
Censorship has became a controversial topic during recent years due to people's perception of concepts such as sex, violence, and hate speech. Many
people and governments want things such as those to be erased from media and art to prevent them within our society. Others however, feel that
children and others should be exposed to aspects such as these and that restricting the use of them in the arts would be a violation of their 1st
amendment. Both sides have strong, deeply rooted views based in law, morals, or religious belief. Both sides also, however, have points that seem
slightly extreme. For years the government and people of the United States and many other countries have worked to "shield" our population from
violence, sexuality, and... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Where pro–censorship supports would claim that movie and television violence sparks violent thoughts in those who watch it, anti–censorship supports
would claim otherwise. One of the most backed up arguments presented by anti–censorship supporters is the restriction of artists creative control and
freedom. Songwriters and filmmakers have been berated and shunned for their works of art due to its subject matter. A prime example would be the
famous director Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino's films have covered many controversial topics such as racism and misogyny, however, even though
these are films the subject matter is thrown back onto the creator. "We both realised we'd cooled on his shtick considerably, for two main reasons: his
obsession with the N–word, and his obsession with sexualised violence." (The Age). Tarantino has been targeted for censorship due to the subject
matter and because of this his creative control and artistic freedom have been violated. While on the topic of film, the PCA "Production Code
Administration", has sought to make restrictions on the number of deaths allowed within films and the manner of said deaths (Greenhaven Press).
However, film and music isn't the only concern in the eyes of those who oppose censorship. Another large concern is the fact that if everything is
censored youth will be ignorant to anything perceived as negative. A large concern is that children will grow up without exposure to any sort of
knowledge about sex, and therefore be uneducated in their later life when the time actually comes (Heins). Artists freedom and exposure to sex all
have deeply rooted bases when it comes to arguments, but one of the strongest arguments is one of the most simple. People live difficult lives with
difficult aspects and these would–be–censored ideas are something that they can relate to (Hopkins). People can easily relate

Essay On Music Censorship
When the thought of music censorship comes to mind, my first perception is that censorship depends on the individual listening to the music. Every
person has a different idea of what censorship consists of and also what should be acceptable or not to the public or for private listening arenas.
Censorship of music and lyrics has always had a strong presence in America. One could hear an edited version of a song or even find the CD sold
on racks as a 'clean version'. This could be a good or bad thing, depending on who you are talking to. There are pros and cons to each opinion. In my
opinion I find that there are more positive aspects of censoring music than there are negative.
There are many pros to using censorship in music. One example is ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Music is perhaps the most accessible form of art in the world, and it is used regularly for people to cope with issues, to gain inspiration or to simply
raise moral. The possibilities of music are endless, and one could consider music a great example of freedom in general. Music with lyrics that are
entirely up to interpretation are commonly censored by the radio and the music industry, even the lyrics are acceptable on a concrete basis. This proves
that sometimes the mind is dirtier than the lyrics in general. Even in times of sensitivity, songs were banned from the radios that were not lyrically
involved whatsoever with what occurred. Thi is san example of the music industry being overbearing and limiting musical freedoms. An important
negative aspect about uncensored music is that teenagers all go through experimental phases, where they learn the dark realities that are common in
life. These phases, though not always, normally end after a while. Music can help teach adolescents about things that they cannot talk to their parents
about, and the censorship of music would just make this common process more difficult to go through. In almost every case, banned music or the
creation of "edited" music has been ignored and people have gotten to the uncensored versions nonetheless. This questions the attempt of censorship in

Arguments Against Censorship Essay
People in society have different opinions on the idea about whether language should be censored or not. To some, censoring is a way to help stop
certain ideas from getting out that they believe might threaten civilization or our humanity. On the other side of the argument people believe that
censoring would violate your First Amendment Right by Freedom of Speech and it also violates your rights to Freedom of the Press. So do you think
that we should keep things the way they are or try to put censorship into effect?
Now from an opposing point of view brings up an article called "Letter to the Editor of the Charleston Gazette" written by Pat Conroy, he believed
that after his books were attempting to be censored that protesting against the Charleston School Board was a great response to defending his work.
Conroy's work was in the process of being suppressed by a group of parents that believed that his work was just a form of violence. He believed that
was ridiculous and that teachers prepare their students for any encounters with violence or profanity in any work. Conroy states "The world of
literature has everything in it, and it refuses to leave anything out". Therefore, he thinks censoring is more on the dramatic side. He believes that this is
a real world and profanity ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
But hiding the truth to "shield our morals of society" like Irving Kristol states, would not really benefit anyone except other democracies. Censoring
violates your rights as an american, which are your First Amendment Rights. If the world was censored then we as people would not have a voice to
be heard anymore. Censorship is something that is used to control people and society. Governments should not control people, people should be
controlling the government. So therefore censorship would not be so great to our society because we as people have a right to

Essay on Censorship
To Censor Literature is to Censor Life
"All that mankind has done, thought, gained or been: it is lying as in magic preservation in the pages of books. They are the chosen possession of
men." Thomas Carlyle spoke these words in the early 19th century. Two hundred years later, it seems we still do not understand the breadth and
magnificence of the written word. Americans have forgotten the magical experiences that can be found in the pages of books. Instead of respecting
the chosen possession of men, they wield it as a tool to achieve their own ends. If we lose our respect for knowledge, we lose our respect for ourselves;
indeed, as Milton so eloquently wrote, "As good almost kill a man as kill a good book" ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These are core arguments offered by a majority of the pro–censorship population. The first, and perhaps most widely argued, is the issue of language,
specifically, profanity in children's literature. Many people argue that curse words have no place in books, and exposing children to such inappropriate
language will contaminate them. Proponents of censorship also object to plot lines in children's books that deal with confusion and uncertainty; they
do not think books should address issues of morality or the meaning of life. They feel that children are not equipped to deal with these issues or, if
they are, then their sole guidance should be parents and other authority figures. Finally, some groups object to exposing children to literature at all
because they feel that it encourages the child to live in a fantasy world. They believe that imagination is dangerous and must be tightly reigned.
Profanity in children's literature has remained, throughout time, the most popular and easily exploitable target for censors; it seems these particular
coals are always simmering in the agenda of some special interest group, be it the Christian Coalition or the local PTA. The theory generally goes that
children's minds are too impressionable to be exposed

Essay Censorship
English 111
October 27, 2013
Censorship
Have you ever been listening to the radio and heard a "beeeeep" in some parts of the song you're listening to? You know, the annoying sound that
interrupts the song? The sound is a familiar one among those of us that listen to the radio, in particular Rap/hip–hop music stations. This noise is heard
because it's used to bleep out/censor the word that was previously there; the word was most likely 'bad' or offensive. Censorship is a growing concern
for our society, whether it's because of the lack of censorship or too much.
To understand censorship, it's important that you know exactly what it is. According to an article by Jonathan Alter, "Let's Stop Crying Wolf on
Censorship" he believes that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One rapper who had his lyrics taken in the wrong context was Sir–Mix–A–Lot. "Believe it or not, some people didn't like when I used the word
'mayonnaise.' And I didn't use it in a bad context," insists the rapper. "I'm not talking about sperm when I say 'It ain't good without the mayonnaise.'
I'm saying, 'When something's good to you, it's not necessarily good for you.' It's not the tappers whose minds are in the gutters. To equate
mayonnaise with sperm, that's kind of sad." (Benesch 42) Some artists feel that being forced to change their words is an obstruction of freedom of
speech. Yes, there are FCC regulations that need to be followed but that doesn't make them moral.
A lot of controversy exists in rap because of the things that are expressed in rap songs and even videos. But deep down rap isn't all about degrading
women, shooting people, or doing drugs. Most and I stress most, rappers rap about their struggles and life growing up but not all of them. Some
rappers didn't have a tough life, but most of the "gangsta rap" raps about real struggles that they and their culture went through. Rap has a history, and
to understand why rappers write about the things they do, you have to understand where it came from. "[rap] expresses views and opinions; it has its
own language, fashion, the way we walk – that bop, that swagger. It's a subculture that's evolved in the inner city and has become global."

The Pros And Conship Of Censornography
Imagine that you could choose anywhere in the world to live, where would you choose and why? A place with a good educational system, safe
housing, adequate infrastructure and sanitation, a decent cost of living, leisure activities, abundant jobs, sounds good, right? However, a very basic
fundamental right is missing; freedom. Be it political, personal or civil we are all entitled to freedom. As long as our freedom does not significantly
affect others or interfere with the freedom of others, we are entitled to it. Our decisions are ours to make and even if some people may find our
choices disgusting, inappropriate or immoral, these are not sufficient grounds to make something illegal. If someone enjoys erotic material, who are
we to judge their preferences? Even worse, who are we to censor pornography on the simple basis that some of us don not agree to it? Producing,
buying, selling or using pornography or pornographic materials is a right of anyone.
The first and most common argument against the censorship of pornography is freedom of expression. If a consenting adults decides to engage in
pornographic material be it for ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I would have to compare this claim with the claim that videogames encourage children to be violent. There are a number of studies and researches
that attempt to prove this is the case as well as a number of studied and researches that attempt to disprove this claim. Yet, no concrete answer can be
given and the decision is left to the guardians of the child. It should be the same with pornography. If we cannot concretely prove that pornography
encourages premarital and extramarital sex then we cannot censor it on grounds of possibility. The decision of watching or participating in
pornographic material should be left for each person to decide for themselves and guardians to decide for their

You Cant Say That John Stuart Mill Summary
You Cant Say That: An analysis of Mills and The Justness of Censorship John Stuart Mill's On liberty is credited with being one of the most
influential pieces of political theory ever written. His writings and societal observations on liberty, freedom of expression, and the limit of authority in
a free society. Some of Mill's most interesting claims were regarding freedom of speech for all opinions, a topic very relevant in the incredibly
polarized American system. Mills views are even extended to protect what is considered hate speech which raises interesting societal questions. John
Stuart Mill argues that it is never right for a government to censor free speech. Yet we do punish hate speech and have rules against derogatory or
biased speech. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mills of course does not just mean amiable discussions regarding similar opinions but focuses on the importance of protecting dissenting viewpoints.
Mill claims that "opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own
infallibility" (Mills, 88). This is is to protect against what Mill calls social tyranny of the majority. Social Tyranny of the majority is when the
majority viewpoint dominants what happens in a society and silences or ignores any other minority opinion or idea (Mill). This silencing of discussion
can lead to the stagnation of society as the flow of civilization follows the majority rule and is not advanced through the development and
understanding of dissenting viewpoints. Mill recognizes that truth is a fluid topic, with every person developing their own truths based off lived
experience and what is important to them, not one person can claim to know the whole truth. Just because the majority views the truth one way, does
not mean the minority is wrong and should not be treated as such. Censoring of these viewpoints does not make the majority any more correct, it just
closes down a way to view something differently which may improve the majority

Arguments Against Censorship
Xenia Gonzalez
English 3
7/8/2015
Censorship, For It or Against It We're growing up, learning new things and ideas, seeing more of the world but should the world show us everything
fully and completely like raw meat you see at the butchery? People have been going at this question many times throughout the years, countries have
it different just like states and so on, but if it came to the point where there had to be a final saying to it and it could never be changed after it, what
would it be? Of course there isn't a straight answer to this, even now there isn't, there's a limit, it has never been completely a yes or no answer, but
should it? Censorship, it's everywhere and on everything that we use, watch, see, etc. that people and/or a company ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
It gives you the ability to teach someone or have someone else or a company to teach something fully with nothing holding them back and explain to
them how this is, why it is, how it is, etc. and show it in a mature and good way. Censoring can also bring up ignorant people, turning them into people
that are closed–minded and that when censoring is no longer there, ignore a truth or something that wrongs what they were told and go against it
saying that the lie they were told is true, like a website's discussion had brought up, "Let's say that a foreign news channel is running an unbiased
documentary on the leadership of our country, the governing bodies of our country cannot do much about what that person or channel is saying, except
stop the people of our country from tuning into such shows. Hence here, censorship is used to keep the ignorant,

The Pros And Cons Of Censorship
Censorship Censorship is a phenomenon that has a 100% chance to affect every person's life and the future lives that will be brought into the world. In
our education system, parents have been arguing about whether they should censor textbooks and other literature for children. There have been many
protests throughout history either for or against such censorship. There are groups fighting for and against censorship interestingly enough almost for the
same reason. They both tend to claim that censorship or lack of is to protect their children now and in the future. To truly understand censorship, we
must find its definition, find the groups associated with promoting it, and groups associated with fighting it to truly understand censorship and ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Some who are generally concerned for their children, those who like to rile up an argument, and those who simply are getting their feelings hurt. Tony
Perkins from the Family Research Council wrote that "For years, the American Library Association has been funneling inappropriate material to kids"
("FRC Promotes Pro–Censorship Group"). Perkins insists that the American Library Association is trying to "bust through censor walls, encrypt their
communication, and override filters" ("FRC Promotes Pro–Censorship Group"). Perkins went as far to claim that librarians are told to tell students that
their book circulation data will never be shared with anyone, including their parents ("FRC Promotes Pro–Censorship Group"). Certain groups such as
the Parents Against Bad Books in Schools fight groups such as the American Library Association and the Texas Freedom Network every day. They
believe "If enough parents become aware of how many objectionable books there are in circulation and work together in constantly challenging them,
situations can improve considerably" said a spokesman from the Parents Against Bad Books in Schools group. Many groups believe that children
cannot handle the adult content and situations that some literature does present. These groups challenge the American Library Association and
schools all of the time. They challenge literature and textbooks. If they win the challenge, they are awarded the literature or textbook out of the
library, school, etc. Some bases for groups challenging literature from 1990 to 2000 are as follows: "1,607 were challenges to sexually explicit
material, 1,427 were challenges to material considered to use offensive language, 1,256 were challenges to material considered non age–appropriate or
unsuited to age group, 842 were challenges to material with an occult theme or promoting the occult or Satanism, 737 were challenges to

Pros And Cons Of Censorship Of Free Speech
Emily Desrosiers
Mr. Benacchio
October 23, 2016
Censorship and free speech
Although it is okay to censor things that could potentially harm a certain group of people or person, there is a line that shouldn't be crossed. Censoring
certain video games and music interferes with the power of free speech and can be argued as unconstitutional. Censorship is censoring anything that
may display any profane, graphic, or obscene content such as nudity, and graphic hate, speech, or symbol. It is a topic that has many different pros
and cons as well as many arguments as to if it should be allowed or not and if it is interfering with the First Amendment of protecting freedom of speech
, religion, assembly, press, and petitio. According to the Constitution,

Censorship In John Stuart Mill's On Liberty Mills
For as long, as I can remember, censorship has been an issue among society's free thinkers. There are those that abide by the rules, never thinking twice
of the repercussions of actions chosen by commanding authorities. There are those that go with the grain of society's guidance, yet wonder where the
line is drawn in the sand, and where it begins. Then there are those that have witnessed the blinding of society and refuse to have White Out cover the
novel that are their opinions and belief. Censorship comes in an extensive array of variations, from speech to educational literature, silencing opinions
and facts alike. Different degrees of censorship have been attempted throughout the ages by scholars, civilians, and governments alike. Often ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mills projects to readers, society, that censorship is not beneficial to the greater good of mankind because of the governing of free thought and
expression. Mills' presentation of his belief in freedom in thought and expression is rooted in the learning habits of man. To Mills, the restriction of
free thought would hinder, if not cripple, the progression of mankind as a whole. The fallibility of mankind, the fact that everyone makes mistakes
and fails at some point, would be an essential attribute of life lesson lost to censorship, if not allowed to be uncensored. Mills argues this point is
proven and driven home by expressing that opinions, if true, are only partial. Opinions in Mills' eyes, are often tarnished due to the reason that most
only believe and advertise the facts that they want to believe in, often disregarding those that show opposition to their core beliefs. Mills uses
Christianity as a prime example of his beliefs, saying that Christians focus primarily on what someone shouldn't do, rather than a positive view on what
they should do. Mills essentially preaches that freedom of speech and expression, is valuable to the growth of society, and hindering that would be
destructive to the progression of

Internet Censorship Of China, South Africa And Other...
Internet censorship in China, South Africa and other countries is something that prohibits real discussion from taking place regarding issues that affect
the public. For instance, in China, certain key word searches are automatically filtered out so that users cannot find the information they are seeking.
While Internet censorship may be good from one perspective (in terms of stemming the flow of child pornography, curbing false information, or
putting a nation's interests first), it can be viewed as bad from another perspective (in terms of cutting down on the opportunity to inform sides of a
dialogue, promoting free exchange of ideas, or discussing why one form of pornography is allowed but not another). This paper will show why
Internet censorship can be interpreted in both positive and negative ways depending on the perspective that one adopts (whether one is pro–Statist or
anti–Statist). In short, pros and cons depend wholly upon one's worldview and outlook. The first pro may be, as Lorentzen (2014) notes, that "a partial
censorship strategy" is an effective way for governments to control the levels of discontent in their respective countries (p. 405). Lorentzen (2014)
observes that this is a model that could be applied in China as it attempts to control its Internet content, though he argues that all nations could utilize it,
"permitting half of the discontent to be reported when discontent is high and all of the discontent to be reported when discontent is

The Handmaid's Tale Gender Wars Analysis
Can Either Side Truly Win? A Warning to the Feminist Sex Wars
During the 1980's when Margaret Atwood wrote The Handmaid's Tale, the Feminist Sex Wars were occurring, in which feminists failed to agree on
whether sexuality should be embraced or barred. There are two main groups that emerge during the sex wars: Those who are anti–pornography, and
pro–sex feminists who see sexuality as a necessary aspect of female freedom–one that should be amplified, not eliminated. The two sides butt heads in
a series of debates regarding pornography, erotica, lesbian sexual practices, violence in sexual settings such as sadomasochism, and prostitution. The
progression of the feminist movement reached a screeching halt during this time because of how deeply divided the community became as a result of
the Feminist Sex Wars. Margaret Atwood argues within The Handmaid's Tale that the complete success of either side of the 1980's feminist debates
will result in the reduction of freedom for women by creating a dystopian society that has experienced both outcomes: a past that is pro–sex but lacks
'freedom from', and a present that is anti–pornography but does not contain 'freedom to'.
The past of the society in The Handmaid's Tale is based off of what would happen if the pro–sex side of the feminist wars were to win entirely. Pro–sex
feminism revolves around the need for female sexuality to be accepted by society. Feminist Sex Wars enthusiast Andrew McBride notes that "'Pro
–sex'
feminism thought

The Importance Of Censorship
Imagine a society without censorship, where everyone knows each other's secrets, it would be lethal for society. What would happen if people knew
one's weaknesses?. There is evil that needs to be censored. Censorship is necessary in our society for many different reasons. It protects nations,
prevents conflict in society, it protects the morals/privacy of people, and it is also helpful for children.
Censorship Protects a Nation
Censorship is very important in relation to a nation, "It restrains vulgarity and obscenity" (Pillai). It helps the nation against any danger. First, it
protects military information that could be used for evil, then, it can also help on controlling panic and rumors throughout a nation, "A similar case was
observed in India in 2008 when terrorists attacked The Taj Mahal Palace Hotel in Mumbai" (Pillai). Finally, censorship preserves the secrets of the
entire nation, secrets that could put nations in danger (Pillai). Censorship can lead to a peaceful society by protecting our secrets from those who want
to harm us.
Censorship Prevents Conflict In Society
Censorship helps to evade conflict in different ways, "Censoring hate helps to promote peace" (11 Biggest Pros and Cons of Censorship). By
censoring hate we can stop the rumors of hate through our society, and we could only worry about our community, and not for those who hate. There is
wealth violent material in Internet that can be accessed with ease, this exposure is dangerous because it makes

Should The Government Regulate The Internet
These days the internet has become an essential part to living for almost everyone but one of the controversial topics that people bring up is that
whether or not the government should regulate information on the internet. Both sides have valid points which form a reasonable argument. Some
people would say that they need to because of the dangers lurking around in the cyber world but the reasons for why the government shouldn't regulate
the Internet outnumber the reasons for why they should. The federal government should not regulate or censor information on the internet because
doing so violates the first amendment and citizen's right to privacy, degrades the educational value of the web, prevents the promotion and facilitation of
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In 2011, several people started a "Don't Filter Me project." They wanted to remove the web filters on the school computers that blocked several
educational sites. They filed lawsuits and demanded that they unblock these sites and take away the web filters. Also another group of people
petitioned the Supreme Court to strike down the Communications Decency Act in Reno v. ACLU in 1997. As a result, the court granted the "highest
level of First Amendment protection to the internet." Also in 2004, the Supreme Court "announced that it will not hear government's appeal of a ban on
the Child Online Protection Act." They thought of this as a violation of the First Amendment (Internet Censorship 1).
Once again, it would be common sense to allow someone their first amendment and privacy rights. Without these rights, the people would never be
able to truly express their ideas to the public. If the government censored the internet, people would not be able to publish what they wanted to because
of the internet regulation. Instead of thinking creatively and coming up with new ideas, people would have to follow regulations. This could be a
danger to society because it would hinder the people from succeeding, evolving, and gaining more information. This is why people should be allowed
to think freely without the federal government censoring and regulating the internet (Redwin 3). This country started on the foundation and basis of
freedom so it should be kept that

Music Censorship
Kevin Ung
Professor Vazquez
English 101
October 9, 2007
Music Censorship I enjoy and love music very much. I feel that music artists should have the right to freely express their work and I feel that I
should argue about the censorship attacks on these artists. I'm tired of listening to a good song on the radio with some of the words censored. It
ruins the song and I can't stand it. Some people think that rap is a bad influence and causes the young to behave badly. But I think all this censoring
has something to do with racism because it is mostly black people singing the songs. The first website list the good side and bad side of rap censorship. I
think half of this site is pretty good to use for my paper. The second website has a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I don't think this site is appropriate for reasons mention above. But this site is a little better because I can actually view the whole essay plus the
sources the person used. This makes the paper more reliable. This paper mostly shows the beginnings of how rap got started and the troubles of
censoring it went through. The writer does seem to be against censorship but this paper is mainly just facts for the reader and not that much
persuasive. I would recommend my readers to read this for the freedom issues the write discusses about. ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) would
be appropriate for my readers to contact. ACLU is a political organization that is nonprofit and nonpartisan. They have many civil liberties members
and supporters. They protect individual rights, your First Amendment rights, your right to equal protection under the law, etc. Censorship goes
against your freedom of speech and so they try and protect that from music artists who are having their work censored. The strongest piece of
information I have discovered from this aspect of my research came from reading the paper on the second website. I read about how PMRC (Parents
Music Resource Center) claimed that popular music was responsible for influencing the young like increase of rape, crime, suicide, etc. This
organization goes against everything I'm fighting for and is the main problem

Internet Censorship: Annotated Bibliography
Jason Iloulian
Nov 10th – 2015
DB Homework: 4 Researched and Evaluated Sources
1.China's strategic censorship
a.http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/
detail?sid=1289961b–2b86–43a8–a309–a9c3b6ca75e5%40sessionmgr4005&vid=0&hid=4002&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=9534
b.Source: American Journal of Political Science. Apr2014, Vol. 58 Issue 2, p402
–414. 13p.
c.This source relates to my research topic because I will be explaining how China is an example of a country using Internet Censorship. This article
states the pros/cons that come with Internet censorship.
2.Internet censorship in South Africa: a brief exposГ© of negative and positive trends.
a.http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/
detail?sid=3b7fda9d–5900–4827–af6c–a1ca781e4e62%40sessionmgr4001&vid=0&hid=4002&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=a9h&A
b. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Source: South African Journal of Libraries & Information Science. 2014, Vol. 80 Issue 1, p41
–51. 11p.
c.I came across this source and it caught my attention. I originally wasn't planning on using South Africa in my research essay but I figured it wouldn't
hurt my essay if I use another country. This article addresses the pros/cons of Internet censorship in South Africa. At first, I never thought there was
Internet censorship in South Africa but apparently there is. This source will make my argument stronger because I will have not only China listed as a
country that uses Internet censorship but South Africa as

Internet Censorship of Child Porngraphy Essay
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."– Benjamin Franklin.
Technically speaking, internet censorship is difficult to achieve. Proponents of this measure seem to have neglected the fact that putting in place a
system of surveillance requires the establishment of clear, unalterable rules. But often, such a task can be almost unfeasible since it is quite
problematical to define precisely the information that is supposed to be blocked. In the context of hate speech for example, it is important to
acknowledge the existence of a line between criticism, whether it is constructive or not, and pure animosity.
How can we know for sure that the server will identify accurately ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When it comes to legal videos that may be inappropriate, the team instantly resorts to age–restriction. Both of these internet giants encourage free
speech while supervising it and immediately removing content that is clearly offensive to the general public. This concept of self–regulation is a good
alternative to extensive Internet censorship, since the website only has its own contents to focus on, rather than having an entire system of surveillance
watching over the web, with the risk of it making errors in the process. Most importantly, the main idea behind these guidelines is not censorship, but
moral, reasonable control.
We should not let the government interfere and impose its draconian laws. Censorship is nothing but a violation of fundamental civil rights, starting with
freedom of speech. By defying the First Law of Amendment (reference), internet surveillance will only give the government greater power to run our
lives. Without our free will and autonomy, we are helpless, incapable of making a change. The Internet is a place that promotes freedom, in all its
forms. Web surfers connect to each other and share their ideas for the world to read. Above all, they become fearless. They stop thinking about who
could stop them because they know that they are united, in this huge yet intimate world. Anarchists from all over the world come together and send
their support

How To Write A Synthesis Essay On Huckleberry Finn
Mark Twain's "Huckleberry Finn" has been stirring controversy and emotion since its creation, and now we are being asked if we should edit/censor
the work by replacing the oh so hurtful "n–word" with "slave." USA TODAY writer, Martha T. Moore, shows different views on the edits, but M.
Moore hints it as a form of censorship like Huck's "sivilizing." Mother, Lorrie Moore, expresses that the "n–word" is essential to the literary work, but
too much for high school kids to handle. Leonard Pitts Jr. from the Miami Herald says that the book in its authentic form is justified to be taught to
children and emphasizes the importance of maintaining the artistic choices of Twain. M.Moore opens her article with the line: "...Mark Twain is being
"sivilized" just like his hero Huck Finn." Using this as an introduction, along with the fact... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
on all fronts. The point Pitts has about the book is that replacing anything is taking away from a lot of what the novel has to offer. The n–word literally
meant "product," inhuman, property. What "slaves" does is take away the disconnection between people who saw black skin as property and those
African Americans living at that time period. "Slaves" to us has a history of intense emotional turmoil of a discriminated race. "N–word" (in
discrimination context) is taboo now, but has not lost all meaning in what it meant during Twain's time. The point of Twain's story is to show how
wrong it is to consider a race as "product." That is the point of the word and replacing it with anything else will make it unfaithful to history or lose
meaning entirely. Pitts wanted students to answer hard questions like "Why did Twain choose that word?" to help young readers comprehend what
they are reading. The fact that I, a highschool student, and many of my classmates understood this aspect also proves that we can handle "hard"
literature and should not be held back because of someone's ideas on political

Pros And Cons Of No-Platforming
In Thomas Hobbes's famous work, "The Leviathan" he created his famous "social contract theory", that states individuals will need to give up some
of their own personal autonomy to ensure the security of the state. Looking at this "social contract" as a spectrum, with security on one end and liberty
on the other, one must find a balance between the two. In 2017 there are still on going debates where people want their society to fall on that
spectrum, some would rather have more liberty and others more security. In 2016 the Free Speech Debate put out a video debating whether
no–platforming should be practised at universities. No–platforming can be defined a strategy that argues that certain peoples should not be given a
platform to speak in a certain social space due to their rhetoric constituting hate speech . Both sides of the debate, the pro no–platforming and the anti
no–platforming teams, gave great points on how serious this issue is, and that there can be real life benefits and consequences on either side of the
debate.
Pro No–Platforming The main argument of No–Platforming is that there is an unfair power dynamic at play. A platform gives speakers a medium to
amplify their message without having to debate against protestors; this unfair as it gives those already in power, that have the resources to platform, an
advantage in that they have a greater ability to get their point across, creating a cycle that perpetuates the dominant group of societies message and

Young Adult Censorship
Young adults are reading more than ever these days, and with the young adult literature expanding there are many options for this age group. Parents
should be thrilled, but some are horrified with what their children are reading. Some are concerned that the mature topics and profanity in novels makes
them too inappropriate for certain young adults. To know the content in the books their children are reading they suggest a rating system similar to
movies and video games. Others believe that the rating system would be too constricting to young adult authors and is a form of censorship.
Anti–rating system people believe books can help young adults understand the world and themselves. There should be a middle ground to make both
groups happy. Both... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
According to the Harris and Hodges, "Any attempt to limit access to ideas, however, presented; especially, to limit the opportunity for others to read
certain books or magazines or to see certain films or plays or portions of them" (qtd. Freedman and Johnson 357). With a system that determines what
age group could see certain topics would fall under censorship. This would limit access to certain people because some authority believes it
inappropriate for them. Even the ALA, American Library Association, agree that a rating system would be censorship (Koeblar). Authors would also
censor themselves to fit within a certain demographic. This is already happening in the movie business where there is a rating system in place. "The
2006 documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated argued that an adult NC–17 rating essentially kills a movie's chance of being profitable, and countless
filmmakers have had to edit their movies in order to score a lower rating..." (Koeblar). Imagine The Hunger Games Trilogy by Suzanne Collins.
This series is aimed towards late middle school and high school students, but the themes are pretty dark. If Suzanne wanted to get a similar message
across with a rating for thirteen plus the book whole series would be completely different. People understand that books can be controversial, but
that is okay. In a study with teachers and students both read I Hadn't Meant to Tell You This and they both found the novel controversial, but the
middle school girls believed that was part of the book's importance (Freedman and Johnson 360). If more people could have an open mind like these
middle school girls, books would not need to be censored and there would be no need for a rating

The Debate About Censorship
The Debate about Censorship
Censorship, the control of the information and ideas circulated within a society, has been a characteristic of dictatorships throughout history. In the 20th
Century, censorship was achieved through the examination of books, plays, films, television and radio programs, news reports, and other forms of
communication for the purpose of altering or suppressing ideas found to be objectionable or offensive. There have been assorted justifications for
censorship, with some censors targeting material deemed to be indecent or obscene. Because of this, ideas have been suppressed under the disguise of
protecting three basic social institutions: the family, the church, and the state. In Ray Bradbury's book, Farenheit 451, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
After a U.S. District Court in Maryland first ruled the book was protected under the First Amendment, the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this
ruling because Paladin provided its assistance to the murder with both the knowledge and the intent that the book would immediately be used by
criminals in the solicitation, planning and commission of murder.
Second, in the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and nine followers were found guilty of violating a law that makes
planning to wage war against the government a crime. Federal prosecutors argued that exhortations to his followers amounted to directing a violent
conspiracy. In 1999, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said, the Bill of Rights does not protect an individual who uses a public speech to
commit crimes. The court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect Rahman because his speech was not simply the expression of ideas. Instead
it was used to instruct, solicit or persuade others to commit crimes and violence.
Now, to change sides and show some viewpoint for the argument against censorship, there are a few main topics that are discussed when this topic of
censorship is brought up: restricts Amendment Rights, not objective and bias. In Fahrenheit 451, Montag's society has abandoned

In this book, the author Brian Cogan discusses the most...
In this book, the author Brian Cogan discusses the most controversial television shows in history, South Park. He discusses how South Park even
though seems simple it is a very thoughtful program on television that discusses many social issues. The creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt
Stone created a social and political commentary that has been the most successful in television history. Cogan discusses how South Park is a
commentary on American culture that is focused around controversial issues. The sitcom allows for the creators to become involved in discussions
regarding issues such as religion and sexuality. Cogan inserts that the creators of South Park use every episode to promote their freedom of speech on
these ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I can use this in my research paper because the author discusses the positives of the crude language in South Park. Stephen Holden has been published
for related articles in major newspapers and magazines for over forty years.
Leonard, Devin. South Park Creators Haven't Lost Their Edge. Fortune Magazine: 30. 2006. Print.
In this article, the author Devin Leonard discusses the success of South Park. South Park attracts 3.1 million viewers an episode which is Comedy
Central's highest–rated program; it is more than the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. In 2006, South Park generated $34 million dollars in advertising
revenue. In 1999, when Paramount released South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut, afilm by where the main characters find their way into an R–Rated
film called Terrance and Phillip. The movie was nominated for Academy award for best song– "Blame Canada" and the film had a gross income of $83
million dollars at the box office. After the South Park movie, viewers and critics were looking forward to the satiric take through episodes based on
current events such as 9/11 and the release of the movie Passion of the Christ. Devin Leonard has a passive tone in the article, seems Pro–South Park
and is an editor for Fortune Magazine. I will use this in my paper to show the statistics of how popular South Park really is and to prove that viewers
think the way the material or crude language presented in South Park is relevant

The Pros And Cons Of Censorship
Censorship, what is censorship truly. A blessing? Perhaps a curse, the Dictionary definition of censorship would be the suppression or prohibition of
any parts of books, films, news, etc. (Google search) Which is true, but is it necessarily a good thing. There are many pros and cons of real world
censorship just as there is with many things meant to protect us. Just like a sword, it protects but can cause harm to those in its way.
A common reason for censorship would be the effect certain materials have on our children. Which makes sense due to parents not wanting to let
their children mature too fast. Adults need to realize that not every child is raised the same and that going as far as to censor a book from a school
completely isn't going to help anyone. This is an unforgiving world where humans act through the law of the jungle, survival of the fittest with those
with knowledge will come out on top and censorship prevents us from learning said knowledge. Now children shouldn't have to learn the birds and the
bees that's an understandable topic to censor till they're older and truly ready, but they should know about what they should stay away from in this
crazy unpredictable world.
Authors also are affected by censorship. These artists of words spend months to years working on these books and then just like that, their hard work
is tossed down the drain. This can be really devastating for an author to have what they worked on for hours and sacrificed so much for be

Feminism and Pornography: Differing Views
The pornography debate has been an issue within the feminist movement that has been pushed to the periphery in recent times. It is not as widely seen
on the main stage of the feminist agenda and this may be because of a division in feminist thought with regards to pornography. Generally speaking,
there are "pro–sex" feminists who believe that women have the right to do what they wish with their bodies and there are "pro–censorship" feminists
who believe pornography is inherently degrading and violent towards women. In this paper I am going to discuss the views and opinions held by
each faction of the pornography debate and I will discuss the pros and cons of each view and discuss how every day women (i.e. not scholars
/academics) feel about pornography. To begin I would like to discuss "pro–sex" feminists and their views on pornography. These feminists believe that
women have the choice "to participate in and consume pornography" and many believe that pornography can have positive effects for women. If
participation in pornography is consensual then there is no reason that a woman cannot partake in the production of pornography. This is summed up
in the mantra "a woman's body, a woman's right" and as long as she is not being coerced then she has the right to do what she would like with her
own body. This is where the opinions and views of sex workers themselves come in to play. Self identified feminist porn star Nina Hartley has called
herself an exhibitionist and has been

Apple Watch Controversy
Analyzing the Opposition Article 1: Apple Watch isn't revolutionary, but will revolutionize the wearable market Source: Carly Page (2015). Apple
Watch isn't revolutionary, but will revolutionize the wearable market. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/feature/2398944
/apple–watch–isnt–revolutionary–but–will–revolutionise–the–wearables–market. [Last Accessed 14th April] Summary– the uprising that apple watch
would convey to the market. Author's Argument The complete campaign of wearable is a bit over overestimated. We all came across the project of
goggle glass which was eventually shutdown due to the unsustainable product idea. I believe that in the current scenario, the product might get some
boost in its sales due to the brand name of Apple,... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This would not only eat away a lot of stockholders' money, but eventually lead to the next dot com bubble. My Position Prediction of next dot com
bubble is not very relevant with respect to the current trends in the market. Article: Can China's Social Media Censorship Keep The Lid on Hong Kong
Protests? Source: Emma Woollacott (2014). Can China's Social Media Censorship Keep The Lid on Hong Kong Protests? [ONLINE] Available at: http:
//www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2014/09/29/can–chinas–social–media–censorship–keep–the–lid–on–hong–kong–protests/. [Last Accessed 14
April]. Summary: the internet censorship ramp up by Chinese government which ramped up due to the recent pro–democracy protests Author's
Argument: it is problematic for folks in China to go for pro–democratic crusade using any medium? Internet promotions were restrained by the
government foremost to tightened security and censorship on Chinese internet. My Position Freedom of speech is a birth right of any human being and
restriction them would be an unmanageable long term move, ultimately the broad campaign would create

Censorship Essay
No Need to Censor Pornography
Pornography is often considered an ugly word and possibly an ugly act. The pictures and words of pornography can be vulgar and degrading to
many of us, but is it the evil of all things? Is it, and it alone, responsible for sexism, rape, racism, battery, and child abuse? No! The media is loaded
with many sexist, racist, violent material, and most of it is not considered pornography. The issue of violence and oppression is much deeper than
pornography. Most people are not in favor of pornography; however, the public should not be in favor ofcensoring pornography. Freedom of speech is
more logical than censorship because of the lack of a definition of pornography, individual rights and the claim that ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Freedom of speech; on the other hand, is vital for discussion of pornography. Willis states that, "Pornography–which, my dictionary and I agree7 means
any image or description intended or used to arouse sexual desire..."(182). This definition of pornography is very different from Dworkin's
previously stated definition. Who's definition is correct? An individual or group may not agree with either definition, but they should not be
restricted from expressing their own definition because they have that freedom. If censorship of pomography were in place, the courts would decide
for evetyone how pornography is defined regardless of individual opinions. It only makes sense that freedom of speech be protected otherwise
individual beliefs or definitions will be suppressed. Freedom of speech is logical to have in place if for no other reason than the definition or the lack
of a definition for pornography.
Another issue in this controversy is individual rights. Women's interests are at the top of the list. McEntee suggests, "Studies indicate that porn addicts
are 40 percent more likely to commit a sex ctime than non–addicts..."(174). This quote could have been one of many quotes used by pro–censorship
activists. Their biggest stronghold on censorship is the emotional claim they make for the protection of women. If abuse would stop because of the
censorship of pornography, then by all means, censor pomography. This

Presidential Election Of The United States Essay
Presidential debates in the Unites States are a hot topic around the world. Even though American voters have the role of choosing the next president,
people from many different countries tend to heed interest in the elections, due to the fact that the president of the United States has such an influence
in locations around the world. People rely on the media to obtain factual information about the presidential candidates, their political stances, and
interests in foreign affairs. The fact that information about the presidential candidates can be distributed worldwide by the media is wonderful. Even
though this sounds wonderful, it is possible that statements during the debates, or results from them, can be portrayed with bias by the media, or even
censored. So, there is a possibility that the interpretation of the American presidential candidates, by people around the world, may be altered after a
debate. This change could be influenced by the debate itself, or by media releasing information about the debates. This will be performed by showing
the effect debates and media have on voters in the United States of America, academic journals regarding censorship in Russian media, and ultimately
comparing the results of several of the 2016 presidential debates between presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, portrayed by the
pro Hillary Clinton American News source, the Los Angeles Times, to Russia's pro Donald Trump Pravda Report.
It is a common belief that

Censorship Is A Controversial Topic Essay
Censorship in the media that is a very common yet, controversial topic due to the subject matter being around children and the youth. It has sparked
attention from many government and public individuals that have demanded a probation on certain age groups. The official start on the entire
blockade of certain age groups has started with the MPAA" Motion Picture Association of America" in wanting to prohibit certain age groups from
viewing certain movies, yet there has always been ways around the rating system for the youths. Today,Censorship is a controversial topic that has
many different outlooks on the topic in general for those who may support or oppose the practice in use. Censorship is a major topic that has taken
many activists on top of the issue entirely and on every aspect regarding the issue. Such activist groups proclaim to want rules to be enforced that
would prevent explicit content to be blocked or banned within the public. Which if not in a way would be enforced it would cause the world would be
crazy without it. While there are individuals that support the topic, which support such claims that the bad content is bad for the minds of the young,
and there are those who oppose such practices in a different way. While those who argue that censorship should disappear they come across arguments
that basically suggest that censorship denies access to vital information and fights against the first amendment freedom of speech which applies to all
individual

Censorship And Its Effects On Society Essay
Ever since I can remember I have been asked to write essays with specific criteria and sometimes I was even given articles to write about. Even though
writing this way can be effective, I am an expressive writer and I flourish in situations where I am given freedom to choose what I can write about.
Especially if I am not a fan of the piece I am supposed to be writing about, I will not produce good quality work in comparison to something I am
passionate about. Some people argue that censorship is important to both writers and readers and benefit them both. I believe that censorship can hinder
a writer's progress in literature and may not benefit the reader because not everyone thinks nor reacts the same. Censorship is not helpful to
everyone and it can be argued that it is not only unnecessary, but harmful to others. Censorship among readers does more harm than good, in certain
cases. It will not stimulate the mind of all writers and quite possibly can cause a writer to produce lesser quality work. Literature is a way for people
to escape and allow their imagination to take control and with censorship, people have to stick to very tight guidelines about how to craft their work.
Especially when a student writer's grade is based mostly on specific guidelines, it can hold the writer back from their true potential.
Written in his article entitled, "Letters from Voltaire, 20 June 1733", Voltaire implores the public not to "clip the wings of our writers so closely...those
who,

In Defense Of Pro-Porn Feminism
As a form of media to be consumed, pornography ranks high on the controversy charts. Constance Penley, Celine Parrenas Shimizu, Mireille
Milller–Young, and Tristan Taormino talk about the importance of pro
–porn feminism and how anti–porn feminist's beliefs can in fact be repressive
towards the rights of women (and everyone). It is an anti–porn feminist's belief that pornography is a creation of the patriarchy, and that it only works to
degrade women. Free speech however, is held as an important part of a progressive society and so pro–porn feminists are against the support of
censorship. Believing that porn is only degrading ignores the agency of the women who chose to participate in mainstream porn. They argue that more
importantly it "ignores

Rhetorical Analysis Of Hate Speech Laws
A Rhetorical Analysis on "In Europe, Hate Speech Laws are Being used to Silence Left Wing Beliefs," In light of the recent events in Charlottesville,
where a white supremacist rally turned violent, the argument on whether or not hate speech should be banned has become increasingly more relevant
in America. Those supporting the ban argue that this kind of speech eventually creates a society that doesn't accept the affected minorities as equals,
and can shame them into silence. On the other side, people argue this would infringe upon free speech rights. In Glenn Greenwald's article, "In Europe,
Hate Speech Laws are Being used to Silence Left Wing Beliefs", he addresses how this ban might affect left–wing activism, and the fallacies in the
arguments supporting the ban. Greenwald mainly relies on logos to back up his thesis; that a hate speech ban would not work in America. The
problem he faces with this as his argument is that it makes the assumption that these same issues would arise in America. Other than a brief mention of
his time as a lawyer to back up one talking point, there is very little ethos. While his tone throughout the article feels very neutral and informative, he
makes poor use of logos, leading to an ineffective argument.
In the article, Greenwald focuses on trying to make an argument for why free speech should be protected, even if that speech is hateful. Greenwald
argues this point mainly by showing a collage of examples where hate speech infringed upon

Censorship: Helpful Or Hindering? Essay
What exactly is censorship? Some feel censorship is a violation of their rights. Others say censorship is a must in the violent, abusive world we call
"society." Who has the right to censor? Who doesn't? What needs to be censored, and what doesn't? The fact of the matter is that there are many pros
and cons in the music and entertainment industry about censorship. Personally, I believe that the consumers and viewers should be charged with the
ultimate responsibility of censorship.
One major area in which there is much argument on censorship is that of television. Since its invention earlier this century, television has become the
most popular format for entertainment. We can be entertained, informed, and inspired by programs on... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Will the v–chip automatic censor block out programs such as these out? Some say that another good reason to censor certain television shows is the
theme of the show or movie, such as those which teach bad morals and principles. But for families that watch television together and discuss the good,
the bad and the ugly, there is no need for anything like a v–chip. The lines of communication are open, and the children are taught what is acceptable
and what is not. By relying on a transistor to do their parenting for them, many parents will fall even more out of touch with their children, who will
spend more time trying to get around technology to watch shows they are not supposed to watch. Those are just a few minor points about censorship
on television, but many of the same points can be made about the censorship in music.
In the past, the musician's right to control his work was not in question. This has begun to change in recent years, however, as the lyrics to popular
music have become more explicit. Is a rap group portraying real life in the ghetto, or a heavy–metal band singing about suicide, protected as a singer's
"artistic expression"? Or do these songs really influence society, becoming a cause of violence and hate instead of merely an expression of them? Is
government censorship of offensive and violent lyrics a way to improve society, or simply a way to control who can listen to them, and who cannot?
Yes, that the artists need to

The Importance Of Censorship Content On The Internet
With the rise of the Internet, it has given everyone opportunities to stay better connected in the world today and to be entertained. This has led to the
creation of sites like Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, Google, and so many more. A lot of big companies have implemented the internet, making
them more successful and giving them a wider reach for business. With all this freedom, however, this leads to inappropriate content being on the
internet as well. There is an abundance of violent and sexual content on the internet just like with older media, like movies and music. The difference is
that this unsuitable content is more accessible than before the invention of the internet. This has caused discussion about whether or not the internet
should be censored, and if so, to what extent. While it is understandable why people do not want inappropriate content around them in a more accessible
way, allowing the bad content lets the good content be just as accessible as well. The Internet should not be censored for violent and sexual content
because this silences voices that have the right to be heard and slows creativity and originality in art and entertainment. Additionally, silencingfreedom
of speech takes voices away from the people and gives it to the richest and powerful.
Censoring the Internet would be taking away freedom of speech for the average internet user. The largest internet censorship system is in China, which
censors anything harmless to the Chinese Communist

The Importance Of Censorship Of Books
Should society censor the books teens read
Stories are the back bone of human intellect cave men started by writing on the walls of their cave to tell a story to their families and to keep them
entertained. Then society went on to writing on birch bark. Now we type on a computer and print into a book of many pages of wood pulp bound
together to sell our work to millions of people to tell a story that is meaningful, just for someone to go and possibly ban people from reading your
story. It just is not right. So, this raises some questions; How does censorship affect the intelligence of the teenage brain? Does society need to censor
books or can the parent censor books for their own child? What would happen if we allowed full censorship? These are all valid questions that need
to be answered to distinguish if censorship is a good or bad. Many people may believe that censorship of books is good for the teenage developing
brain, but it is not the case it actually has the opposite effect. The government should actually ban the banning of books.
Books are the best teachers you can ever have, so why take them away from the hands of the young teenagers that are looking for guidance. So, what
are the effects of taking a book away? Well, first off it limits the brain to books that have no meaning, or powerful content. "Censorship is about the
restriction and control of intellectual development" (Bailey, Boyd 11). The governing bodies that censor the books are limiting the

Why Should Banned Books Be Banned

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Dawn Rodriguez

More from Dawn Rodriguez (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Why Should Banned Books Be Banned