Mediaboss Marketing

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative |Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences |Personality | Philosophy | Social |Methods | Statistics |Clinical | Educational | Industrial |Professional items |World psychology |

Social psychology:Altruism Attribution Attitudes Conformity Discrimination Groups Interpersonal relations Obedience Prejudice Norms Perception Index Outline

This article needs rewriting to enhance its relevance to psychologists..Please help to improve this page yourself if you can..

Censorship is the suppression or deletion of material, which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor.

Typically censorship is done by governments, religious and secular groups, corporations, or the mass media, although other forms of censorship exist. The withholding of classified information, commercial secrets, intellectual property, and privileged lawyer-client communication is not usually described as censorship within the censoring community, though can be by outside observers. The term "censorship" often carries with it a sense of untoward, inappropriate or repressive secrecy.

Censorship is closely related to the concept of freedom of speech. It is often associated with human rights abuse, dictatorship, and repression.

The term "censorship" is often used as a pejorative term to signify a belief that a group controlling certain information is using this control improperly or for its own benefit, or preventing others from accessing information that should be made readily accessible (often so that conclusions drawn can be verified).

The rationale for censorship is different for various types of data censored. Censorship is defined as the act or practice of removing obscene, vulgar, and highly objectionable material from things we encounter every day. Whether it is on TV, in music, books, or on the Internet censorship is an inescapable part of our lives. There are five main types of censorship:

In wartime, explicit censorship is carried out with the intent of preventing the release of information that might be useful to an enemy. Typically it involves keeping times or locations secret, or delaying the release of information (e.g., an operational objective) until it is of no possible use to enemy forces. The moral issues here are often seen as somewhat different, as release of tactical information usually presents a greater risk of casualties among one's own forces and could possibly lead to loss of the overall conflict. During World War I letters written by British soldiers would have to go through censorship. This consisted of officers going through letters with a black marker and crossing out anything which might compromise operational secrecy before the letter was sent. The World War II catchphrase "Loose lips sink ships" was used as a common justification to exercise official wartime censorship and encourage individual restraint when sharing potentially sensitive information.

An example of sanitization policies comes from the USSR under Joseph Stalin, where publicly used photographs were often altered to remove people whom Stalin had condemned to execution. Though past photographs may have been remembered or kept, this deliberate and systematic alteration to all of history in the public mind is seen as one of the central themes of Stalinism and totalitarianism.

The content of school textbooks is often the issue of debate, since their target audience is young people, and the term "whitewashing" is the one commonly used to refer to selective removal of critical or damaging evidence or comment. The reporting of military atrocities in history is extremely controversial, as in the case of the Nanking Massacre, the Holocaust (or Holocaust denial), and the Winter Soldier Investigation of the Vietnam War. The representation of every society's flaws or misconduct is typically downplayed in favor of a more nationalist, favorable or patriotic view.

Religious groups have at times attempted to block the teaching of evolution in publicly-funded schools as it contradicts their religious beliefs or have argued that they are being censored if not allowed to teach creationism. The teaching of sexual education in school and the inclusion of information about sexual health and contraceptive practices in school textbooks is another area where suppression of information occurs.

In the context of secondary-school education, the way facts and history are presented greatly influences the interpretation of contemporary thought, opinion and socialization. One argument for censoring the type of information disseminated is based on the inappropriate quality of such material for the young. The use of the "inappropriate" distinction is in itself controversial, as it can lead to a slippery slope enforcing wider and more politically-motivated censorship. Some artists such as Frank Zappa helped in the protest against censorship. Although they usually failed, they did put up an argument against the censorship of other material.

An example of such censorship is, ironically, Fahrenheit 451. The book was themed against censorship, but changed heavily. A Ballantine Books version which is the version used by most school classes[2] contained approximately 75 separate edits, omissions, and changes from the original Bradbury manuscript.[clarify]

[How to reference and link to summary or text]

Scientific studies may be suppressed or falsified because they undermine sponsors' commercial, political or other interests or because they fail to support researchers' ideological goals. Examples include, failing to publish a study which shows that a new drug is harmful, or truthfully publishing the benefits of a treatment while failing to describe harmful side-effects. Scientific research may also be suppressed or altered to support a political agenda. In the United States some government scientists, including NASA climatologist Drew Shindell, have reported governmental pressure to alter their statements regarding climate change.[3]

American musicians such as Frank Zappa have repeatedly protested against censorship in music and pushed for more freedom of expression. In 1986, Zappa appeared on CNN's Crossfire to protest censorship of lyrics in rock music, saying that harm will be done or unrest caused if controversial information, lyrics, or other messages are promulgated.

In countries like Sudan, Afghanistan and China, violations of musicians rights to freedom of expression are commonplace. In the USA and Algeria, lobbying groups have succeeded in keeping popular music off the concert stage, and out of the media and retail. In ex-Yugoslavia musicians are often pawns in political dramas, and the possibility of free expression has been adversely affected.

Music censorship has been implemented by states, religions, educational systems, families, retailers and lobbying groups and in most cases they violate international conventions of human rights.[5]

Copy approval is the right to read and amend an article, usually an interview, before publication. Many publications refuse to give copy approval but it is increasingly becoming common practice when dealing with publicity anxious celebrities.[6] Picture approval is the right given to an individual to choose which photos will be published and which will not. Robert Redford is well known for insisting upon picture approval.[7] Writer approval is when writers are chosen based on whether they will write flattering articles or not. Hollywood publicist Pat Kingsley is known for banning certain writers who wrote undesirably about one of her clients from interviewing any of her other clients.[7]

Censorship is regarded among a majority of academics in the Western world as a typical feature of dictatorships and other authoritarian political systems. Democratic nations are represented, especially among Western government, academic and media commentators, as having somewhat less institutionalized censorship, and as instead promoting the importance of freedom of speech. The former Soviet Union maintained a particularly extensive program of state-imposed censorship. The main organ for official censorship in the Soviet Union was the Chief Agency for Protection of Military and State Secrets generally known as the Glavlit, its Russian acronym. The Glavlit handled censorship matters arising from domestic writings of just about any kind even beer and vodka labels. Glavlit censorship personnel were present in every large Soviet publishing house or newspaper; the agency employed some 70,000 censors to review information before it was disseminated by publishing houses, editorial offices, and broadcasting studios. No mass medium escaped Glavlit's control. All press agencies and radio and television stations had Glavlit representatives on their editorial staffs.

Some thinkers understand censorship to include other attempts to suppress points of view or the exploitation of negative propaganda, media manipulation, spin, disinformation or "free speech zones." These methods tend to work by disseminating preferred information, by relegating open discourse to marginal forums, and by preventing other ideas from obtaining a receptive audience.

Sometimes, a specific and unique information whose very existence is barely known to the public, is kept in a subtle, near-censorship situation, being regarded as subversive or inconvenient. Michel Foucaults 1978 text Sexual Morality and the Law (later republished as "The Danger of Child Sexuality"), for instance - originally published as La loi de la pudeur [literally, the law of decency], defends the decriminalization of statutory rape and the abolition of age of consent laws,[8] and as of July 2006, is almost totally invisible throughout the internet, both in English and French, and does not appear even on Foucault-specialized websites.

Suppression of access to the means of dissemination of ideas can function as a form of censorship. Such suppression has been alleged to arise from the policies of governmental bodies, such as the FDA and FCC in the United States of America, the CRTC in Canada, newspapers that refuse to run commentary the publisher disagrees with, lecture halls that refuse to rent themselves out to a particular speaker, and individuals who refuse to finance such a lecture. The omission of selected voices in the content of stories also serves to limit the spread of ideas, and is often called censorship. Such omission can result, for example, from persistent failure or refusal by media organizations to contact criminal defendants (relying solely on official sources for explanations of crime). Censorship has been alleged to occur in such media policies as blurring the boundaries between hard news and news commentary, and in the appointment of allegedly biased commentators, such as a former government attorney, to serve as anchors of programs labeled as hard news but comprising primarily commentary.

The focusing of news stories to exclude questions that might be of interest to some audience segments, such as the avoidance of reporting cumulative casualty rates among citizens of a nation that is the target or site of a foreign war, or the values of natural methods in the prevention, treatment, and curing of disease, is often described as a form of censorship. Favorable representation in news or information services of preferred products or services, such as reporting on leisure travel and comparative values of various machines instead of on leisure activities such as arts, crafts or gardening has been described by some as a means of censoring ideas about the latter in favor of the former.

Self-censorship: Imposed on the media in a free market by market/cultural forces rather than a censoring authority. This occurs when it is more profitable for the media to give a biased view.

In this form of censorship, any information about existence of censorship and the legal basis of the censorship is censored. Rules of censoring were classified. Removed texts or phrases were not marked.[clarify]

[How to reference and link to summary or text]

In this form of censorship, censors rewrite texts, giving these texts secret co-authors.[clarify]

[How to reference and link to summary or text]

Under US law, the First Amendment protects free speech and freedom of the press to some degree. Radio broadcasts are under constant scrutiny. This amendment does not mention many things, one being obscenity (a term usually applied to sexual material), but the common interpretation ignores this aspect using the argument that there is no social value deemed applicable to it. This applies only to the government and government entities; private corporations are under no such restriction.

Main article: Censorship of maps

Google Earth censors places which may be of special security concern. The following is a selection of such concerns:

Censorship in the Internet - In January 2007, a Brazilian Supreme Court judge issued an order to Brasil Telecom and Telefonica preventing public access to an intimate video of model Daniela Cicarelli and her boyfriend Renato Malzonithe on the YouTube site. Cicarelli and Malzoni had sued YouTube the previous year and got an injunction for the removal of the video, but it was still appearing. YouTube staff were eventually able to prevent the video from appearing on their site.[9]

Wikipedia itself is unavailable to Internet servers in certain countries, such as Iran, China, and North Korea, due to Internet censorship. [10]

View post:
Censorship | Psychology Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia

Censor means to examine in order to suppress or delete any object that may seem objectionable. I believe censorship is wrong because certain materials may not be objectionable to some people. Censorship is used in radio and television to prevent the corruption of peoples minds. Censorship is wrong because individuals should have the freedom to listen or watch what they want, whether or not it offends some, without interference.

The television is one place where censorship is strongly used in many different ways. One of the oldest and most common ways used to censor inappropriate words is to use a bleep. I disagree with this method because whatever these people are saying is just words. Remember the saying sticks and stone may break my bones but words will never hurt me? These words will not harm anyone and if people are offended they dont have to listen. Another popular method of censoring television is to cit out scenes. TV stations will cut out a certain scene or scenes from a movie or television. I disagree with this method because it changes the way that the producer of these shows or movies intended them to be. If TV stations plan on cutting out scenes they should not air the show or movie at all. One last method of censorship commonly used in television is rating labels. Again, this is a method of censorship I disagree with. Although these ratings allow parents to protect their children from bad things, if a show is on TV it should be viewable by all audiences. Also most things being censored will be seen by most people in their lives anyway. Censorship in TV is a bad thing and should be reconsidered.

The music industry is a place where people experience censorship. One form of censorship in music is to play and edited version of a song. While this method filters out some harmful words, I think this is bad because it changes the musicians original song.

This censoring takes out parts of the song he intended to be there. I think the radio shouldnt play these edited version, but play unedited version. Another popular method of censorship is to put parent advisory labels on CDs. These labels are bad because they dont allow underage people to buy certain CDs. Why should these underage people not be able to listen to bad words or inappropriate themes if it is part of real life. The government is trying to put a blanket over childrens eyes until they get older.

They want to brainwash the children so they will stop corruption in the world . One last way music is censored, just like television, is using bleeps. These bleeps are terrible, annoying, and useless. They ruin songs that you are listening to. Who wants to sit and listen to a song littered with bleeps, because I sure dont! If people dont want to hear bad words they should buy country music, and leave the rest of the world alone.

Censorship is a terrible thing and it should be outlawed at some point. The government should stop trying to control the way the U.S. citizens live and focus on more important issues like the war in Afghanistan. Citizens should be left alone to live and not be constantly bothered by the annoyances of censorship.

You can order a custom essay, term paper, research paper, thesis or dissertation on Censorship topics at our professional custom essay writing service which provides students with custom papers written by highly qualified academic writers. High quality and no plagiarism guarantee! Get professional essay writing help at an affordable cost.

2.11 avg. rating (46% score) - 9 votes

Tags: censorship essay, censorship research paper, censorship term paper, example essay, sociology essays, write censorship essay

Read more:
Essay on Censorship | CustomWritings.com Blog

What is censorship? Censorship is a form of prohibition and punishment.Ever since the 15th century products of the printing press have been subject to censorship and since the 20th century the same has applied to film, radio, television and the Internet. Censorship thus relates to public communication and content in word, image and sound.Censorship generally focuses on communication and content that is displeasing to secular and religious rulers. It concerns opinions on state and politics, theological and religious issues, issues related to social (in)equality, sex, honour, and norms and values.We can distinguish between censorship before the fact, or preventive censorship, and censorship after the fact, or repressive censorship. In both cases this entails censorship from above, often backed up by royal, civil or religious laws. In turn, those potentially open to prosecution or persecution find creative ways of anticipating or evading the censorship.Censorship can also take the form of self-censorship. Authors, printers, publishers, journalists, cartoonists, photographers, cineastes and bloggers try to avert the threat of censorship from above or they submit to pressure from their own ranks. They still have their own thoughts and opinions, but these are not made public.

The rise of movable type printing in the 15th century triggered preventive and repressive censorship from above. In the 17th and 18th century the stream of subversive books, pamphlets, prints and cartoons, newspapers and journals increased and thus also the scope and intensity of the control exerted over these. Control and censorship were never complete, could never be complete, because the government and the church could never fully seal the meshes of the net. During this period the Netherlands, and above all Amsterdam, functioned as a 'safe haven' for forbidden authors and printed matter from the surrounding countries.In the 19th and 20th centuries the principles of freedom of expression were generally and legally established in democratic states, even though this process was sometimes slow and hesitant. In practice, however, the authorities continued to keep these freedoms in check. Censorship legislation remained in place and was regularly amended.This trend was fuelled by the rise and growth of emancipatory movements, of political movements advocating mass democracy as well as by the increasing power of the state. As the 20th century progressed, the role of the state as censor was realized more through indirect curbs than through direct censorship, and the instruments of censorship became more refined.

See the rest here:
Censorship! - Introduction

Introduction | The First Amendment and Public Schools | Censorship | Student Protest Rights |How Big a Problem is Censorship? | Roles and Responsibilities | Censorship Policies | Resource Guide

A. Understanding Censorship: Censorship is not easy to define. According to Websters Dictionary, to censor means to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable. Its central characteristic is the suppression of an idea or image because it offends or disturbs someone, or because they disagree with it. In many countries, censorship is most often directed at political ideas or criticism of the government. In the United States, censorship more often involves social issues, and in school is commonly directed at so-called controversial materials.

Advocates for censorship often target materials that discuss sexuality, religion, race and ethnicitywhether directly or indirectly. For example, some people object to the teaching of Darwins theory of evolution in science classes because it conflicts with their own religious views. Others think schools are wrong to allow discussion about sexual orientation in sex education or family life classes, and others would eliminate The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn from the English curriculum because of racial references.

Most pressures for censorship come from parents who disapprove of language or ideas that differ from or affront their personal views and values, but demands can emerge from anywhere across the religious, ideological, and political spectrum. The range of controversial topics appears to be limitless: religion, science, history, contemporary and classical literature, art, gender, sexuality, one-worldism, health, multiculturalism, and on and on. Many demands appear motivated by anxiety about changing social conditions and traditions. Feminism, removal of prayer from schools, the emergence of the gay rights movement, and other trends with implications for family structure and personal values, have all generated calls for censorship.

Censorship demands require educators to balance First Amendment obligations and principles against other concerns such as maintaining the integrity of the educational program, meeting state education requirements, respecting the judgments of professional staff, and addressing deeply held beliefs in students and members of the community. Challenging as these circumstances may be, educators are on the strongest ground if they are mindful of two fundamental principles derived from the Supreme Courts First Amendment decisions: 1) educators enjoy wide latitude in exercising their professional judgment and fulfilling their educational mission if their decisions are based on sound educational and pedagogical principles and serve to enhance the ability of students to learn; and 2) the decisions that are most vulnerable to legal challenge are those that are motivated by hostility to an unpopular, controversial, or disfavored idea, or by the desire to conform to a particular ideological, political or religious viewpoint.

Pursuant to these principles, lower courts generally defer to the professional judgments of educators. As discussed in Fact Sheet #8, this sometimes means that the courts will uphold a decision to remove a book or to discipline a teacher, if it appears to serve legitimate educational objectives, including administrative efficiency. However, administrators and educators who reject demands for censorship are on equally strong or stronger grounds. Most professional educational organizations strongly promote free expression and academic freedom as necessary to the educational process. Access to a wide range of views and the opportunity to discuss and dissent are all essential to education and serve the schools legitimate goals to prepare students with different needs and beliefs for adulthood and participation in the democratic process.It is highly improbable that a school official who relied on these principles and refused to accede to pressures to censor something with educational value would ever be ordered by a court of law to do so.

There are practical and educational as well as legal reasons to adhere as closely as possible to the ideals of the First Amendment. School districts such as Panama City, Florida and Hawkins County, Tennessee have been stunned to find that acceding to demands for removal of a single book escalated to demands for revising entire classroom reading programs. The school district in Island Trees, New York encountered objections to 11 books in its library and curriculum, including Slaughter House Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Black Boy, by Richard Wright, and The Fixer by Bernard Malamud. Other jurisdictions have been pressed to revise the science curriculum, the content of history courses, sex education, drug and alcohol education, and self-esteem programs. Experience has shown far too many times that what appears to be capitulation to a minor adjustment can turn into the opening foray of a major curriculum content battle involving warring factions of parents and politicians, teachers, students and administrators.

B. Distinguishing Censorship from Selection: Teachers, principals, and school administrators make decisions all the time about which books and materials to retain, add or exclude from the curriculum. They are not committing an act of censorship every time they cross a book off a reading list, but if they decide to remove a book because of hostility to the ideas it contains, they could be. As the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and International Reading Association (IRA) note, there is an important distinction between selection based on professional guidelines and censorship: Whereas the goal of censorship is to remove, eliminate or bar particular materials and methods, the goal of professional guidelines is to provide criteria for selection of materials and methods.

For example, administrators and faculty might agree to take discussion of evolution out of the second grade curriculum because the students lack sufficient background to understand it, and decide to introduce it in the fourth grade instead. As long as they were not motivated by hostility to the idea of teaching about evolution, this would not ordinarily be deemed censorship. The choice to include the material in the fourth grade curriculum tends to demonstrate this was a pedagogical judgment, not an act of censorship.

Not every situation is that simple. For example, objections to material dealing with sexuality or sexual orientation commonly surface in elementary schools and middle schools when individuals often parents or religious leaders demand the materials removal with the claim that it is not age appropriate for those students. On closer examination, it is clear their concern is not that students will not understand the material, but that the objecting adults do not want the students to have access to this type of information at this age. If professional educators can articulate a legitimate pedagogical rationale to maintain such material in the curriculum, it is unlikely that an effort to remove it would be successful.

Of course, hardly anyone admits to censoring something. Most people do not consider it censorship when they attempt to rid the school of material that they think is profane or immoral, or when they insist that the materials selected show respect for religion, morality, or parental authority. While parents have considerable rights to direct their own childs education (see Fact Sheet #9), they have no right to impose their judgments and preferences on other students and their families. School officials who accede to demands to remove materials because of objections to their views or content may be engaging in censorship. Even books or materials that many find objectionable may have educational value, and the decision about what to use in the classroom should be based on professional judgments and standards, not individual preferences. Efforts to suppress a disfavored view or controversial ideas are educationally unsound and constitutionally suspect.The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. at 535 (1925).

C. Consequences of Censorship: Whats so bad about getting rid of materials containing profanity? Many people dont want their children using that kind of language even if they do it themselves, and many parents believe that seeing profanity in books or hearing others swear encourages youngsters to do the same, especially if the act goes unpunished. Yet profanity appears in many worthwhile books, films and other materials for the same reasons many people use it in their everyday languagefor emphasis or to convey emotion. As Shakespeares Hamlet says to the players, the purpose of drama is to hold, as twere, the mirror up to nature.

Works containing profanity often contain realistic portrayals of how an individual might respond in a situation, and some teachers intentionally select such materials to remove the allure from cursing. But even minor use of profanity has not shielded books from attack. Katherine Patersons award-winning book Bridge to Terabithia contains only mild profanity, but it has been repeatedly challenged on that ground, as have long-acknowledged classics like Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck. Profanity, however, is only one of many grounds on which books are challenged. Almost every classic piece of literature including The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, The Diary of Anne Frank, and Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet has been for some reason, in some place, at some time.

As these examples illustrate, censorship based on individual sensitivities and concerns restricts the world of knowledge available to students. And that world could get smaller and smaller. Based on personal views, some parents wish to eliminate material depicting violence, others object to references to sexuality, others to racially-laden speech or images. Some parents oppose having their children exposed to fiction that doesnt have a happy ending, teach a moral lesson, or provide noble role models. If these and other individual preferences were legitimate criteria for censoring materials used in school, the curriculum would narrow to including only the least controversial and probably least relevant material. It would hardly address students real concerns, satisfy their curiosity, or prepare them for life.

Censorship also harms teachers. By limiting resources and flexibility, censorship hampers a teachers ability to explore all possible avenues to motivate and reach students. By curtailing ideas that can be discussed in class, censorship takes creativity and vitality out of the art of teaching. Instruction is reduced to bland, formulaic, pre-approved exercises carried out in an environment that discourages the give-and-take that can spark a students enthusiasm for learning. To maintain the spontaneous give and take of the classroom setting, teachers need latitude to respond to unanticipated questions and discussion, and the freedom to draw on their professional judgment and expertise, without fear of consequences if someone objects, disagrees, or takes offense.When we strip teachers of their professional judgment, we forfeit the educational vitality we prize. When we quell controversy for the sake of congeniality, we deprive democracy of its mentors. Gregory Hobbs, Jr (dissenting in Board of Education of Jefferson County School District R-1 v. Alfred Wilder)

Censorship chills creativity and in that way impacts everyone. In a volume entitled Places I Never Meant To Be, author Judy Blume, whose books are a common target of censorship efforts, has collected statements of censored writers about the harms of censorship.

According to one frequently censored author, Katherine Paterson:When our chief goal is not to offend someone, we are not likely to write a book that will deeply affect anyone.

Julius Lester observed:Censorship is an attitude of mistrust and suspicion that seeks to deprive the human experience of mystery and complexity. But without mystery and complexity, there is no wonder; there is no awe; there is no laughter.

Norma Fox Mazur added:where once I went to my writing without a backward glance, now I sometimes have to consciously clear my mind of those shadowy censorious presences. Thats bad for me as a writer, bad for you as a reader. Censorship is crippling, negating, stifling.. It should be unthinkable in a country like ours. Readers deserve to pick their own books. Writers need the freedom of their minds. Thats all we writers have, anyway: our minds and imaginations. To allow the censors even the tiniest space in there with us can only lead to dullness, imitation, and mediocrity.

Censorship represents a tyranny over the mind, said Thomas Jeffersona view shared by founders of our nationand is harmful wherever it occurs. Censorship is particularly harmful in the schools because it prevents youngsters with inquiring minds from exploring the world, seeking truth and reason, stretching their intellectual capacities, and becoming critical thinkers. When the classroom environment is chilled, honest exchange of views is replaced by guarded discourse and teachers lose the ability to reach and guide their students effectively.

See original here:
The First Amendment in Schools: Censorship

on September 30, 2017 at 11:29 am

In January 2011, Egyptian activists, inspired by a successful uprising in Tunisia, began organizing a demonstration using Facebook. In a matter of days, thousands of protesters who learned about the event through the social media platform gathered in Cairos Tahrir Square to protest the longstanding Mubarak regime.

Then, in an attempt to quash civil unrest, the Egyptian government soon took the bold step of cutting off the countrys internet access. As the size of protests swelled from thousands to millions of people, the Mubarak regime quickly realized their mistake: never cut off a millennials internet access.

Mubarak was ultimately forced to resign after just 18 days of massive protests, but in that time Egypts Arab Spring demonstrated two major things: (1) the incredible organizing power of the internet, and (2) the how quickly a government could slam the door on the free flow of information.

The Egyptian government was able to quickly and effectively shut down the chokepoints that connect its citizens to the outside world. Etisalat, for example, is a centrally located routing system that could see up to 58% of Egypts IP addresses.

In other words, Mubarak was essentially able to blockade every website in the world by making a few simple phone calls.

Egypts dramatic internet shutdown became a new template for other precarious regimes, but also sparked a broader global conversation around online censorship.

Todays infographic comes to us from WhoIsHostingThis and it provides a detailed look at varying levels of internet censorship around the world today.

Internet users in North America and Europe enjoy relatively unfettered access to online content, while most countries in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East have some level of censorship. Torrenting is restricted in almost every country in the world, with a notable exception being Switzerland, where a laissez-faire approach is applied to downloading content for personal consumption.

Its also worth noting that this map does not address government surveillance, which is ubiquitous even in countries with high levels of internet freedom.

If you want to liberate a country, give them the internet

Wael Ghonim, Egyptian internet activist

Much of the worlds population accesses an internet that is at least partially censored. Countries have different motivations for restricting access and filtering content. Below are a few high-profile examples.

ChinaWhen most people think of internet censorship, China springs to mind. This makes sense as the country has a small army (upwards of 50,000 people) monitoring internet activity at all times. Also, much like Egypt, the government forces all online traffic through a mere three central routing systems. This makes it easy for censors to sift through all data entering and leaving the country.

Chinas censorship apparatus is so advanced, it can take a very granular approach to repression and enforcement.

TurkeyThe countrys swelling blacklist of 100,000 websites, coupled with harsh penalties for any whiff of anti-government sentiment, have created an extremely restrictive environment for Turkish internet users.

EthiopiaIn 2016, the government of Ethiopia blocked access to social networking sites to prevent cheating during the university entrance exam period.

North KoreaUnauthorized surfing of the internet is a dangerous activity in the Hermit Kingdom. The primary smartphones, tablets, operating systems, and browsers used in the country were all developed by the government, and content on the 5,000 or so accessible websites is tightly controlled.

Even when censoring measures are pervasive and effective, people continually find ways to slip between the cracks. For years, people have used proxy servers and virtual private networks (VPNs) to access content beyond their countrys censorship wall, but censors are getting better at discovering proxy servers and simply blocking them as they would any other site.

As a result, newer techniques are gaining popularity:

SteganographySteganography is the science of hiding information. Basically, an innocuous file like an image can be stealthily encoded with information to evade detection by censors. Even changing a single pixel on a series of images can be used to relay a message, provided the recipient knows what to look for.

Refraction NetworkingThis circumvention tool uses partnerships with ISPs and other network operators to provide Internet freedom to users. Rather than trying to hide individual proxies, whole networks outside the censored country can become a conduit for the free flow of information.

Thank you!

Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!

Please provide a valid email address.

Please complete the CAPTCHA.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Embed This Image On Your Site (copy code below):

Related

Nick Routley is a creative director and writer at Visual Capitalist, a media website that creates and curates visual content on investing and business.

View original post here:
Infographic: A Map of Internet Censorship Around the World