Claim: Public media centers such as libraries act as knowledge outlets to the general public. These media outlets already deal with censorship, and adding more censorship would be harmful to today's education process. By limiting our access to different subjects as well as different viewpoints, there would be a major hindrance on the need to gain knowledge. Many people actively utilize their local media centers, moreover, if censorship was abundant within these facilities, many people would be starved of the knowledge they are seeking for. While the media centers would continue to supply information, there would be insufficient access to needed materials thus leaving an inadvertent negative impact on education. The implemented censorship would directly effect not only our generation, but future generations as well. While the change may not be visible at first, the lack of knowledge on aimless topics will become very evident.
Support 1: Media outlets have been designed for peoples educational gain, and by censoring the offered content within the media centers, there would be an absence of knowledge that someone could have potentially used. Furthermore, there is a range of people from primary school students to those attending university who still use these media centers. From personal experience, I use
…show more content…
While middle school students who are running into the library seeking their local copy of Fifty Shades Of Gray are deemed insubordinate and mischievous, they are in actuality seeking out knowledge in subjects that they believe to be intriguing. Therefore, censorship in public spaces would in fact persuade adolescents to stop searching for information on subjects they think they would enjoy. By sending these subliminal messages to the youth, we would theoretically setting up our future generations for failure by persuading them to stop the pursuit of
Book banning is a prime target for censorship. Censorship in print media, notably book banning, occurs across homes, schools, stores, and other facilities daily. Censorship in the schools is the most widespread and exposed place for book banning. Do
Censorship and freedom of expression within school campuses has attracted a lot of debate and discussion over the years. School authorities have a difficult time in ascertaining where to draw the line between free enquiry and moral hazard. It is a surprising fact that in a country with a rich liberal tradition like the United States, there have been over 250 attempts by school districts at book banning in 31 states. This is just in the last 4 years. As shocking as this information is, “over 85% of bans go unreported either due to poor media attention or lack of opposition. Censorship leaves students with an inadequate and distorted picture of the ideals, values, and problems of their culture. Writers may often be the spokesmen of their culture, or they may stand to the side, attempting to describe and evaluate that culture. You must have some theory of
“A word to the unwise. Torch every book. Char every page. Burn every word to ash. Ideas are incombustible. And therein lies your real fear.” Ellen Hopkins. The government in this society is burning all of the knowledge. The books may be burnt but ideas and your imagination are unretrievable, that can be passed down through generations. The government has the real fear. Censorship is bad and takes away from your imagination and creativity.
The government's ban on books and suppression of dissenting viewpoints stifles intellectual freedom and brings conformity and unclashing ideas, which highly limits how far society can grow intellectually. Bradbury vividly portrays the consequences of censorship, illustrating how the suppression of diverse perspectives erodes individual autonomy and inhibits societal
According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).
cons, where censoring is a violation of their First Amendment rights. It violates some of the rights that the First
The word censorship is from the Latin word root of censere, which means to give an opinion or expression to be judged upon. Censorship is the restriction of certain material, and due to its expression it is seen offensive to someone else. The origin of expression of censorship can be tracked back to the Roman Empire when Roman officials assessed the conduct and attitudes of other Roman citizens. The Roman government viewed that in order to have a strong government, the behavior and conduct of the peopled had to be changed according to what they thought was correct. Censorship continued to be a controversy over time. It remained a controversy over time, through many empires, the age of Enlightenment, World War II, and even today. As censorship progressed through the ages it still continues today. Today, censorship occurs at schools. It occurs in libraries, classrooms, and even in student publications. Even though censorship can occur to a certain extent at schools, students’ First Amendment rights are still protected at school. The First Amendment protects freedom of expression, speech, press, religion, and assembly. Students are allowed to express themselves freely at school as long as they do not affect the education and as long as it is not an activity supported by the school system.
Every day well meaning parents, concerned members of society, and Christian activist groups across the country fight to censor the literature that is being taught in high school classrooms. The word censorship carries all types of implications and angles; it involve s a denial of an author's right to guaranteed freedoms of expression. However, as it relates to education, this issue goes a great deal deeper than the standard First Amendment argument. In attempting to ban certain types of literature from the classroom, censors are taking away the rights of teachers to prepare students for a reality that their parents do not seem to think will ever affect them. They likewise deny students the
Knowledge is power. Using knowledge, people can reshape society and the world as a whole, changing it for the better. However, gaining access to the necessary wealth of information requires a full education: people should be taught multiple ideologies and topics from an unbiased perspective. They must receive access to various viewpoints in their entirety. Teaching only one worldview strips students of their ability to truly analyze the world and its issues, because they cannot look beyond the one restrictive narrative they learned and therefore cannot develop their own perspective. Censorship hinders schools, institutions with the purpose of informing students and helping them develop their beliefs. Therefore, schools should not practice censorship when selecting literature for students because censorship obscures the purpose of literature, because censorship fails to expose students to a variety of ideas, and because censorship removes students’ ability to develop unique opinions and worldviews; education should provide an unbiased view of the world and many ideologies, so students can take their own stance on various issues rather than blindly following what they learn.
“Censorship is harmful because it results in the opposite of true education and learning.” (American Library Association). If students are only learning certain topics, then they might start to discriminate against the situations they don’t understand because no one has taught them before about the subject. They might also learn “to make decisions irrationally in light of the evidence.” This is why the American Library Association is against censorship.
Lastly, there are those parents and republicans who are for censorship and say that censorship should stay. Some of their reasoning are that it protects the children from racial themes, strong language, and violence. It could also lead to children misbehaving and being raised the wrong way. Nevertheless, books are books and children will eventually learn how the world really is. That’s is why if censorship continues, it’ll hold back a child’s learning
Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been
Censorship cases often bring about debates over students’ first amendment rights. Students’ first amendment rights are important to preserve so that students can not be excluded from meaningful works or literature. It is understandable for the government to design educational plans as a way to get its voice into classrooms, but “the truth-promoting function of the First Amendment provides no reason, however, to question the right of students to explore a variety of ideas and perspectives, and to form and express ideas of their own” (Brown, 1994, p. 30). Schools already place a restriction on religious material or material addressing current political controversy (Brown, 1994).
Many students, parents and teachers may think this is a bad thing but they don’t understand that censoring some things may have some benefits rather than being all bad.
Monkey see, monkey do, a simple phrase relevant to today’s society. Those in society that simply do not know any better, such as children, are inclined to imitate what they see being done. Without censorship daily television shows are increasingly exhibiting more violence, foul language and sexuality to susceptible youth. Due to lack of censorship, explicit music lyrics and inappropriate images on music videos are being introduced to impressionable children. There is a lack of control on the internet leading to internet addiction and forces vulnerable adolescents to face cyber bullying. In a variety of mediums not enough censorship is used, which influences impressionable youth to think and behave negatively.