Although letting the public watch such films as Childs Play, the Exorcist and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre it has been proven that these types of films provoke violence and many murders can be blamed on the film industry. There has been a large amount of research trying to identify the effects of the media on the public, especially in relation to violence. There have been several cases of copycat murders from such films as Natural born killers and Childs Play 3. The results to this research claimed that somehow if we the audience were to watch a violent film; then we will carry out the same brutal acts. This is not totally true as people with aggressive tendencies may watch violent videos but that does not necessarily mean that everyone who watches violent videos will become vicious. By ruling out violence in films so the public does not see it does not mean violence will go away forever.
In the circumstances of a people actually governing themselves, it is obvious that there is no substitute for freedom of speech and of the press, particularly as that freedom permits an informed access to information and opinions about political matters. Even the more repressive regimes today recognize this underlying principle, in that their ruling bodies try to make certain that they themselves become and remain informed about what is really going on in their countries and abroad, however repressive they may be in not permitting their own people to learn about and openly to discuss public affairs. Whether anyone who thus rules unjustly, or otherwise improperly, can be regarded as truly understanding and hence truly controlling his situation is a question not limited to these circumstances. Lord Radcliff could speak as well about the apparent indifference of censors of all kinds to the depiction or portrayal of mindless violence and brutality, that witless rejection of civility that threatens to be the Black Death of the twentieth century. Thus, it is not usually noticed today that Mill recognized that a people has to be trained properly to make use of the considerable liberty he advocates.
The Essay on Film Violence Violent Films People
Film Violence Do you think there is a case for censoring films more radically than present or is this an infringement of personal liberty? Films are often blamed as an influencing factor in violent crimes, most notably murder. People think that films have influenced a number of killers in high profile cases such as the Jamie Bulger murder, which was linked to 'Childs Play 3' by the press. Another ...
If, for example, a community should recognize that television is corrupting the young, distorting the political process, and generally playing havoc with education and the public character, is it really helpless to do anything about it? Would it be censorship to abolish altogether such a baleful influence? And if abolition of television should be considered censorship, may not that suggest that censorship is not altogether bad? What, in short, is the popular character presupposed for effective self-government, and how is that character properly to be developed and maintained? Such questions reflect the fact that censorship and freedom of the press problems depend for their sensible resolution upon more general considerations of liberty, of the common good, and of the rights, virtues, and duties of citizens entrusted with self-government.
Thus, Tocqueville could observe in Democracy in America (183540): It cannot be repeated too often: nothing is more fertile in marvels than the art of being free, but nothing is harder than freedoms apprenticeship. The same is not true of despotism. Despotism often presents itself as the repairer of all the ills suffered, the support of just rights, defender of the oppressed, and founder of order. People are lulled to sleep by the temporary prosperity it engenders, and when they do wake up, they are wretched. But liberty is generally born in stormy weather, growing with difficulty amid civil discords, and only when it is already old does one see the blessings it has brought. Among the blessings of liberty may be found the philosophical pursuits that have sometimes appeared so threatening to public order. Laurence Berns has reformulated the ancient dilemma posed by the trial of Socrates, the greatest hero of freedom of thoughta dilemma that exposes one of the roots of the perennial censorship controversy: Is philosophy, the intransigent quest for truth (including the truth about politics and religion), inherently subversive? Does it necessarily undermine political society and conventional morality, or, on the contrary, is a good society impossible without freedom to philosophize? To make a tree grow correctly, you must start caring from the very beginning.
The Essay on Censorship Freedom Or Suppression
Censorship: Freedom or Suppression? Government censorship can be looked at as a blessing or an unneeded burden. I personally feel that all censorship is completely unnecessary and should be found unconstitutional. It is the countless moral views that bring no right answer for what should and should not be censored. I know that the governments version of censorship varies greatly from mine, just as ...
You must not block its nutrients, water nor sunlight, but allow it to move around a bit. Our society needs to be treated in the same fashion. There should indeed be ready access to information, but in varying degrees of freedom, determined not by censorship, but by controlled access. The government is trying to protect the population from the harsh realities of life through censorship of information, but are they really helping, or are they hindering by restricting the individuals freedom to information in a supposedly democratic nation? Is censorship the answer for this huge pile of junk that has been collected over the years and will likely multiply more and more? The simple answer is no. However, I believe that film censorship is the necessary protection. The reality is its too late for that, and trying to censor something for the most part, will make things worse in the end. It is up to you to decide what should go in or out. Censorship will not work for sexual, violent, or generally bad things.
We just have to live to deal with it..
