Censorship
Liberal Censorship (Socratic Seminar)
A brief introduction * It is clear that neither technology nor censorship can stand without impacting each other in one way or another. What we should aim for would be minimize the negative impacts, and maximize the benefits of media. As such, it is clear that we have to strike a balance between censorship and technology. * One clear example would be that new forms of media are making it an uphill task to maintain the extant level of censorship * At the same time, certain censorship laws also adversely impact the diffusion of data in certain media forms.
Censorship – the pros and the cons * It is wiser to err on the side of caution, than to make graver mistakes because of a lack of censorship. * This is as anecdotal evidence has been provided to suggest that media can result in negative impacts on the society. * This is especially evident in the case of racial issues, which still continue to be a rather (touchy) subject in multi-racial Singapore. * Perhaps the most well known example would be that of the Maria Hertogh riots, where biased reporting by the Malay press escalated racial tensions and resulted in the racial riots that left 18 dead. This proves that the lack of censorship may result in adverse and severe impacts on the society, bringing across the desperate need for some form of censorship in Singapore to safeguard public interests. * The unimpeded flow of ideas and comments may not result in enlightenment, but instead lead to further misunderstandings. * The question is, when does censorship infringe on our personal freedom of speech? The authorities claim that censorship is necessary to Singapore’s society simply because our society is too conservative and such controversial content is too much for us to handle. However, the problem with such an argument is that the authorities decide what to censor. How are they to actually know what we can or cannot stomach decide the content
A brief introduction * It is clear that neither technology nor censorship can stand without impacting each other in one way or another. What we should aim for would be minimize the negative impacts, and maximize the benefits of media. As such, it is clear that we have to strike a balance between censorship and technology. * One clear example would be that new forms of media are making it an uphill task to maintain the extant level of censorship * At the same time, certain censorship laws also adversely impact the diffusion of data in certain media forms.
Censorship – the pros and the cons * It is wiser to err on the side of caution, than to make graver mistakes because of a lack of censorship. * This is as anecdotal evidence has been provided to suggest that media can result in negative impacts on the society. * This is especially evident in the case of racial issues, which still continue to be a rather (touchy) subject in multi-racial Singapore. * Perhaps the most well known example would be that of the Maria Hertogh riots, where biased reporting by the Malay press escalated racial tensions and resulted in the racial riots that left 18 dead. This proves that the lack of censorship may result in adverse and severe impacts on the society, bringing across the desperate need for some form of censorship in Singapore to safeguard public interests. * The unimpeded flow of ideas and comments may not result in enlightenment, but instead lead to further misunderstandings. * The question is, when does censorship infringe on our personal freedom of speech? The authorities claim that censorship is necessary to Singapore’s society simply because our society is too conservative and such controversial content is too much for us to handle. However, the problem with such an argument is that the authorities decide what to censor. How are they to actually know what we can or cannot stomach decide the content