English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Think about it. Either everything should be censored strictly, or nothing should be censored at all.

2007-02-23 09:31:24 · 26 answers · asked by Titainsrule 4 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

26 answers

(If this is too much to read, read my "Long story short" below.)

I have serious trouble with this issue. On the one hand, I wonder who the government is to decide what to censor. On the other hand, I look at the media, and see they have NO concern about the image they portray to young impressionable minds.

Let me start by saying I am not supporting censorship toward society. I am supporting censorship toward our children.

You're right, it should be all or nothing. And I think everything should be censored to an extreme degree, ESPECIALLY commercials. Everything in the public media should show only positive images, and should be of sound moral guidance. It is for this reason I emphasize censoring commercials; because EVERYONE views commercials, and we are all being told we HAVE to be beautiful! TV-14 Shows should automatically be locked, and the standards for such a rating should be increased greatly. I view a lot of shows with a TV-14 rating, and I think to myself, if I had children and they were teens, I would NOT want them viewing this material! I think we should censor everything TV-14 to a standard as it was in the 40's.

However, adults (who are not at an impressionable age), should be allowed to view anything they want. There should be 3 ratings. E for educational, G for the general public (with a standard equal to that of the 40's), and A for adults (which should be most of what's at a TV-14 rating today!, and shall also include what is, today, rated M).

Although I feel everything should be censored, when it comes to political issues, I digress. Political issues should not be censored, while it should also not be encouraged through mass media. We cannot live in a society in which the government is allowed to tell you what not to do, if we are not allowed to encourage a behavior opposite that. That is a highly unfair advantage against the people. I feel the government should not be allowed to tell us what not to do, and political issues should be expressed freely, on appropriate stations. In fact, when it comes to issues the message the government sends should be positive. For example, instead of "Stop Abuse", it should be said "Promote Respect", instead of "Don't do drugs", it should be "Keep your mind clean", etc. Something of that nature.

To those that say, "If you don't like it, change the station", here is my problem: MOST PARENT'S DON'T CARE WHAT THEIR KIDS WATCH! So, good children go to school with a bunch of kids who watch mature shows, and the child who has parents that ACTUALLY care about what their children view is considered an outcast, because that child is not up to date with the latest slutty fashion, or doesn't own the latest violent video game all the other kids have. I am so scared to have children in the future, because I see the media, I see how it's affecting our youth, and I don't want my kids growing up like that, while at the same time, I don't want them to be considered outcasts!

Yes, I agree, that when a parent raises a bad child they have NO right to blame the media. No parent can blame the media for their misbehaved children. They can only blame themselves for not changing the station!

However:

To those that say, "If you don't like it, change the station", my concern is not my own children, but the children that surround my child! My concern is society as a whole!

And as far as radio stations go, the same needs to go for that. Especially because the radio is PUBLIC! They need strict guidlines, and if you don't like the guidlines, pay for it, and get rid of the censorship. But the main point is, children should not have easy access to such bad messages, like songs called "Promiscuous Girl", or songs supporting violence, etc. These are music only adults, who don't have impressionable minds, should be allowed to listen to.

2007-02-23 11:11:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Nah. It's not necessary to set up the all-or-nothing opposition. But I think there's generally more censoring going on all around than there should be. The government certainly has _no_ right to censor.

And censoring "everything" treads on dangerous ground because the media that is allowed would be controlled by a very small group of people who would, because of their speech privileges, have a whole lot of power that no small, exclusive group should have.

What I find ironic is parents having a tizzy over their kids seeing Janet Jackson's boob, but not over the kids watching and imitating violent and often bloody television shows and movies that promote violence-for-fun and violence-as-best -way-to-solve-everything.

2007-02-23 09:59:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, NOTHING SHOULD BE CENSORED , if it's something on TV you don't like USE THE REMOTE if you know that a book have something you don't like don't read it .
I come from a country where during 40 years even the kisses in the Hollywood movies were censored and dialog in movies as GONE WITH THE WIND translate in a different way....do you think that is right?

2007-02-23 09:41:24 · answer #3 · answered by torreart 3 · 2 1

I hate these all or nothing questions, they go against what I fully believe in, which is balance.

I choose that nothing should be censored. If kids shouldn't be watching certain tv shows or hearing certain dirty songs, then their damned parents should keep them from doing so. I do think that violence in the media and such is bad, but maybe a society that glorifies violence should be questioning itself on that issue instead of the issue of censorship. ( When I say glorifying I mean as in media like movies with "woohoo let's go kill people for fun and whatever" or "hey gonna slap a hoe, yous a nice big hoe" songs. Media that has violence but isn't glorifying it is a different story (for example, the movie Shindler's List))

2007-02-23 09:49:15 · answer #4 · answered by Southern Girl 4 · 4 0

Can you spell flawed "logic"? Should psychopathic behavior which harms "innocent victims" go unanswered? Should we begin with you? Laws are made because of the obviously toxic behavior of many of your species, in an ongoing way.

But, perhaps you are using censored in a much narrower context. For example dealing with "pornography", a popular topic among the younger set? Censored, however, really relates to disallowing all forms of "unacceptable" behavior, culturally speaking. A more inclusive scope.

2007-02-23 09:40:59 · answer #5 · answered by drakke1 6 · 1 1

Nothing should be censored outright, but I feel that there should be warnings for people who want to shield their children from such material. I have said for a long time that parents should take a more active role in raising thier kids rather than using TV and the Internet to do it for them.

2007-02-23 09:35:25 · answer #6 · answered by The Bat 3 · 2 1

It does depend on the medium. Anything that is openly displayed in public like billboards, advertisements, benches, etc. should be censored for inappropriate content. But TV, Music, Movies, etc. should never be edited for content. People always bring up the argument that good parents (like Tipper Gore) should fight for tougher music and movie ratings, ban violence in games and music, nonsense like that. But if you really were a good parent I think you would actually monitor what your children are doing.

2007-02-23 09:42:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Doesn't happen...nice try at propaganda, however. Besides, you can always go visit Faux "news" or any of their affiliates, to include talk radio, to continue advocating gun violence or government overthrow all you want. That's what right-wingers do, isn't it? Or set up your own facebook page with a U.S. map that TARGETS Democrats by name and solicits violent action from rabid gun nuts by putting CROSSHAIRS on these named Democrats' districts...that's what Palin does. Why not follow in your vain-glorious leader's footsteps and join her on her peacock throne while her looks last?

2016-05-24 03:31:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

yes
we do not live in some foriegn countries where executions are shown on TV, thus some censorship is warranted, keep in mind the FCC owns the airways, which is controlled by the public, and the public has mandated limited censorship
cable is private and hence exempt from some forms of it ( censorship ) since your paying for that ( verse over the air broadcasts ), those against any form of censorship are genrally fools and have limited knowledge of how social networks work with community standards

2007-02-23 09:44:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

i don't think anything should be cencored because u have the chose of u and/or your children listening,watching,ETC. It. the things that are censored out now are things that are said in schools everyday it is not like your children or u will never hear it!!

2007-02-23 13:56:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers