Censhorship Essay Example

after hearings. However, the Clinton administration instructed the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate the impact of violent movies and video games on American youth. This led to victims suing the industry in hopes of self-censorship. Following a controversial halftime show during Super Bowl XXXVII, the entertainment industry began examining its sexual content. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was tasked with investigating whether the broadcast violated federal indecency laws. Unlike in the Columbine case, most Americans did not support this investigation. An online poll conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs for Associated Press and published on CBSNEWS.com showed that nearly 80 percent of respondents considered it a waste of money to investigate, while only 18 percent believed that actions during the halftime show were illegal.

The government's censorship investigation reinforces its tightening regulations and suggests that it is up to the industry itself to bring about moral change in society. Several arguments favor allowing censorship as mass media is seen as today's primary educational source with evident harmful effects on society. It is argued that modern media breeds a dysfunctional society unable to uphold civilized values. However, only government has authority over censoring inappropriate material.
Despite their apparent validity, these arguments are flawed. While mass media is undoubtedly a significant educational resource for society, it may not be suitable for all age groups. The responsibility to enforce social norms regarding what minors should and should not watch lies with parents. Although certain television content can be harmful to young minds, not all television has negative effects on individuals.

Granting the government control over mass media would violate the First Amendment and allow unlimited control over viewing choices. This could potentially

result in propaganda promotion and manipulation of youth by those in power, as seen during World War II when Adolf Hitler's Nazi party utilized media influence to blame the Jewish population for Germany's struggles.

Allowing any government to impose censorship laws grants them power to manipulate the population, despite media being intended to remain unbiased. It is crucial not to grant such control to any government. To prevent government censorship, some propose self-censorship within the entertainment industry where the industry itself takes responsibility for censoring its content.Although this approach may protect First Amendment rights and prevent government censorship, it still enforces an unfair form of censorship that limits artistic expression. Within the entertainment industry, artists, directors, and other contributors are restricted from expressing themselves due to self-censorship. The entertainment industry has control over the art that viewers see, making it difficult for creators to showcase their work. In a Wall Street Journal article, Michael Eisner discussed how certain forms of expression such as violence or sexual infidelities may be protected by the First Amendment but are deemed undesirable in civilized society. Instead of censoring such material, individuals should have the freedom to determine their own moral standards. News outlets should strive to uphold community standards without placing responsibility on the entertainment industry. The role of the entertainment industry should solely involve informing the public about available content and allowing individual parents or adults to decide whether they want to engage with it or not. Society often receives criticism for its perceived lack of morals, but neither government censorship nor control over artists is the solution. Rather than blaming others like parents or authority figures, society must

confront its own moral flaws. Shifting blame only worsens the problem at hand; censorship never truly resolves anything.Instead of revealing the truth, it simply hides the reality we need to confront. Our authentic experiences play a crucial role in shaping our character, even though they may be difficult at times. Supporting censorship not only harms those who create media but also negatively impacts the audience they intend to reach. The article "Creative Matrix" by Postrel argues that stifling new ideas has detrimental consequences for both individual creators and future generations who will inherit their contributions (Lowenthal, David."Why the Mass Media Must Be Censored," Furist October 1998;Eisner, Michael E. "A Little Restraint, Please," The Wall Street Journal 24 April 1998;Postrel, Virginia."Creative Matrix," Reason August/September 1999;McCormick, Steve."Nascar Censorship Reaching New Heights," 28 Nov 2004;Associated Press."Poll: Janet's Revelation No Crime,"21 Feb 2004).