Someone says that there cannot be 100% press-freedom in country Y because.....(continue)?

Question

because not all Y residents are highly-educated. The rural areas' residents did not receive good education, these people are often unable to distinguish right from the wrong, easily influenced by their emotions and religions, or be used by people with such motives.

I think that's rubbish. How can I argue with him? (I want an argument that will stand logically)

Answer 1

"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington

Answer 2

He's right, we aren't allowed to incite violence, libel etc with our speech. If his culture is sensitive to certain speech acts, then they should not be performed in public.

Or all censorship is wrong?

I think it is, but you won't find any basis to an argument for it.

I don't think there's anything you could say in public that would shock anyone. And if libel was allowed, those who do it will just lose credibility...

Answer 3

Tell him/her that press freedom will aid in building up that nation's human capital where regards to the exposure of critical thought is concern.Baby steps.

Answer 4

my god, think how the press in all its forms have manipulated us in the past, and how much they will in the future. give them free reign and we will have anarchy in total