Mediaboss Marketing

Internet Censorship Debate

Censorship refers to any action taken by a society to control access to ideas and information. Throughout history, many different types of societies, including democracies, have used censorship in various ways. The issue is increasingly important due to the rapid development of new communication technology. As innovators continue to create new ways for people to share information, many people are now arguing over the issue of censorship.

For the proponents of censorship, restricting the access of information is something that can provide benefits to society. By censoring pornography on the internet, children are less likely to encounter it. By censoring certain types of images and videos, society can prevent offensive or vulgar material from offending those that it targets. For example, some would argue that society should censor material that is insulting to a particular religion in order to maintain societal harmony. In this way, censorship is viewed as a way to protect society as a whole or certain segments of society from material that is seen as offensive or damaging.

Some argue that censorship is necessary to preserve national security. Without using any kind of censorship, they argue that it is impossible to maintain the secrecy of information necessary for protecting the nation. For this purpose, censorship protects a state's military or security secrets from its enemies who can use that information against the state.

Those who are against censorship argue that the practice limits the freedoms of speech, the press and expression and that these limitations are ultimately a detriment to society. By preventing free access to information, it is argued that society is fostering ignorance in its citizens. Through this ignorance, citizens are more easily controlled by special interest groups, and groups that are able to take power are able to use censorship to maintain themselves. Additionally, they argue that censorship limits a society's ability to advance in its understanding of the world.

Another main issue for those who are against censorship is a history of censorship abuse. Those who argue against censorship can point to a number of examples of dictators who used censorship to create flattering yet untrue images of themselves for the purpose of maintaining control over a society. They argue that people should control the government instead of the government controlling its people.

See the original post here:
Internet Censorship Debate | Debate.org

censorship cases...

Lauren Myracle's teen/tween fiction series starting with ttyl, the first-ever novel written entirely in the style of instant messaging conversation, was the most frequently banned or challenged book in 2009 due to complaints of "frank, mature content."

And Tango Makes Three by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson, a book about penguins raising a child, was the 2nd most banned for objections that it "makes homosexuality sound normal." It ranked no. 1 for most banned book in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

The "Twilight" book series, which have turned into a blockbuster film franchise, ranks as the 5th most requested books to be banned by public libraries. Stephanie Meyer's stories of vampires and teen romance have been criticized for sexual content, religious views and being "unsuitable for the age group."

For years, various religious groups have protested the themes of wizardry in J. K. Rowling's books, which don't appear on the current top 10 list, but Harry Potter's tales remain in the Top 100 Most Challenged Books of the Decade.

"It's not just the books under fire now that worry me. It is the books that will never be written. The books that will never be read. And all due to the fear of censorship. As always, young readers will be the real losers." - Judy Blume

"Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech." -Benjamin Franklin

"Libraries are places of inclusion rather than exclusion." - American Library Association

"Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us." - William O. Douglas

Follow this link:
Delete Censorship.org

Provisional Irish oval censor handstamp in English only - used September 1939

The site now hosts an array of Civil Censorship and Military Mail information mostly related to World War II but adding material from other periods as collectors provide covers to show and as other information comes to hand.

Click on "What's New" to see latest additions

The British based Civil Censorship Study Group is now the foremost group studying civil censorship since it was started in 1972. It was founded to fill the gap between the two societies dealing with military mail and the AGZ that studied both military and civil mails

A wide range of examples are here for you to see the censorship and military mail items collectors like to included in their collection

Current displays include WWI Finland, WWII Germany & DEI

These examples have been made available by the generosity of some dedicated collectors who want to share their material with others - thank you

POW - WWII

NATO

Korean War 1950-1953

Suez Crisis 1956

St Lucia Censorship

CCSG Bulletin Index

The more than 350 members of the British based Forces Postal History Society study all aspect of worldwide military mail since it was founded in 1952

Civil censorship is the censorship of mail, that can include opening, reading or marking of mail emanating from or sent to civilians primarily during war time or periods of unrest though occasionally during other times too

The Dublin Censor Office

The Military Postal History Society, previously the War Covers Club, is based in the United States and concentrated on US military mail but now has a worldwide outlook

Mail from military forces can include mail during war time or during military campaigns as well as regular military postal markings as applied at APO's and FPO's onto mail to and from of military personnel, as well as Peacekeeping Missions of the United Nations, and does not always include censorship by opening or reading of the mail

This section has covers sent in by collectors who need like help to identify the markings

Can you identify the marks on this cover?

SITE MAP

See more here:
Welcome the Postal Censorship Site

Comparison between the cut British DVD rated BBFC 12 and the uncut Australian DVD.

In November 2006 a new Bond movie was released. In spite of initial skepticism by the popular press and some fans, too, Daniel Craig could convince both critics and the audience in the graver and more serious Casino Royale, after the incredible stunts of his predecessor. Daniel Craigs introduction became the most successful Bond in history and topped Die Another Day easily.

The new toughness, rediscovered after Licence To Kill by the film makers, caused some problems for the movie, eventually leading to the release of 3 different versions of the movie in different parts of the world. While the previous movie only had a ridiculous and harmless sex scene being an overkill only for the USA, Casino Royale had a difficult time once again at its British home.

On the informative homepage of the British Censorship Board BBFC BBFC, whose censors were able to watch the movie prior to its premiere so that the movie makers could know how close they were to the desired "12 A" rating, one could learn about a torture scene which had to be cut for the English version.

It didnt take long to make clear that the cuts would be permanent for the English version of the movie, causing justified concerns that other countries would receive the same censored version. Fortunately that didnt happen. The censored version was only shown in English cinemas and was only released there on DVD. In Australia the scene remained intact.

The USA received a cut version of their own. There the torture scene turned out to be without difficulty for the important PG-13 rating but what usually is too much for Americans of this age bracket is realistic violence.

Exaggerated and cartoon-like violence hardly disturbs the MPAA or the American public than a realistic and matter-of-factly presented battle for life or death.

Of all things Casino Royale wanted to distinguish itself from the previous movies in that category in order to win back the adult audience which often doesnt like too much fantasy and extravagance in action movies anymore. Two scenes - the stylish black-and-white fight in the bathroom and the confrontation in the staircase - had to be mitigated considerably.

Interesting in this connection is that, besides the deletion of several scenes, there are some individual shots which are missing both in the English and in the Australian version. Whether these shots were deleted because of censorship reasons in the different countries or that they were added into the US version to compensate the deleted scenes (to get the desired PG-13 rating) and to keep the editing rhythm is unknown.

2 deleted und 1 alternative scenes in the English version with a total difference of 13 seconds.

Read the original here:
James Bond 007 - Casino Royale (2006) - Movie-Censorship.com

WHAT IS MODERN CENSORSHIP?

At Project Censored, we examine the coverage of news and information important to the maintenance of a healthy and functioning democracy. We define Modern Censorship as the subtle yet constant and sophisticated manipulation of reality in our mass media outlets. On a daily basis, censorship refers to the intentional non-inclusion of a news story or piece of a news story based on anything other than a desire to tell the truth. Such manipulation can take the form of political pressure (from government officials and powerful individuals), economic pressure (from advertisers and funders), and legal pressure (the threat of lawsuits from deep-pocket individuals, corporations, and institutions).

In our view, the only valid justification for declining a news story is that in a medium limited by time and space, another news story was simply more important to the people of the community, whether local, national or international. While admittedly a subjective process, it is nonetheless, a process to be undertaken by the news people themselves (the investigative journalists and editors), NOT by the managers and CEOs of their parent company. No professional journalist or researcher should ever have to face the destruction of his or her career (or life) simply because they wanted to tell the truth. While no two people will always agree on what story is more important than another, a system where the working reporters and editors run the newsroom would at least provide a fertile environment for debate, dissent and critical thinking.

The growth of independent media and journalism in recent years shows that people throughout the world yearn to hold not only their leaders accountable, but their media sources as well. For that reason, the Project Censored research program continues, in its small way, to support and highlight those who tell the truth about the powerful (no matter the consequences) and are relentless in their quest to hold Big Media accountable for their decisions.

See more here:
Censorship by Ownership? - Project Censored