-
rexchinnappa
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:03 am
This is my first attempt at AWA. Please fell free to criticize any faults.
TOPIC:
"In some countries, television and radio programs are carefully censored for offensive language and behavior. In
other countries, there is little or no censorship."
In your view, to what extent should government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs?
Explain, giving relevant reasons and/or examples to support your position.
RESPONSE:
The issue of censorship and its effects are dichotomous and it is also one of the most debated topic to which finding a side has always been difficult. However I believe that censoring of graphic and text content is beneficiary considering its positive results.
The freedom to express has always been a very important right in most of the developed countries. Though censorship acts as a hurdle to this right, I believe that it actually regulates the extent of freedom one is entitled to. Consider a popular and eminent individual with perverse thoughts as an example. If he either advertently or inadvertently creates a visual or textual content that is telecasted, without censorship, there is a very high chance of different groups of people perceiving it in different ways. Even worse if it is related to the majority of the people in a country; then the integrity of the nation is at risk. Therefore a mistake of an individual would proliferate as a group's.
Another credit worthy situation is the present sate of television shows in most countries. With the advent of REALITY SHOWS, most of the channels are gunning for more and more viewer ship. More TRPs mean more viewer ship. In such instances, the authenticity of the content being aired has to be scrutinized very care fully. Censorship in this form is also very important as the uninformed viewer may believe whatever is displayed to him. For example if a show uses a high level of violence even though it is all drama in reality, the influence on the viewer would be violent.
Either the government or a govt. appointed committee should be responsible for the content being aired. The extent to which censorship must be implemented is subjective. For example, in China, most of the content on the internet and television is regulated by the government. This increases hatred among the citizens toward the govt. Therefore only considerable regulation is required as in the case of the US. Here though the govt. is strict in classifying content into various categories it assigns certificates which guide the viewers. In other words, the government acts as a viewer discretionary ensemble which censors strident material and allows viewers to enjoy what they are entitled to.
Hence my belief is that moderate censorship has more than enough reasons and advantages to make it a conscientious choice.
TOPIC:
"In some countries, television and radio programs are carefully censored for offensive language and behavior. In
other countries, there is little or no censorship."
In your view, to what extent should government or any other group be able to censor television or radio programs?
Explain, giving relevant reasons and/or examples to support your position.
RESPONSE:
The issue of censorship and its effects are dichotomous and it is also one of the most debated topic to which finding a side has always been difficult. However I believe that censoring of graphic and text content is beneficiary considering its positive results.
The freedom to express has always been a very important right in most of the developed countries. Though censorship acts as a hurdle to this right, I believe that it actually regulates the extent of freedom one is entitled to. Consider a popular and eminent individual with perverse thoughts as an example. If he either advertently or inadvertently creates a visual or textual content that is telecasted, without censorship, there is a very high chance of different groups of people perceiving it in different ways. Even worse if it is related to the majority of the people in a country; then the integrity of the nation is at risk. Therefore a mistake of an individual would proliferate as a group's.
Another credit worthy situation is the present sate of television shows in most countries. With the advent of REALITY SHOWS, most of the channels are gunning for more and more viewer ship. More TRPs mean more viewer ship. In such instances, the authenticity of the content being aired has to be scrutinized very care fully. Censorship in this form is also very important as the uninformed viewer may believe whatever is displayed to him. For example if a show uses a high level of violence even though it is all drama in reality, the influence on the viewer would be violent.
Either the government or a govt. appointed committee should be responsible for the content being aired. The extent to which censorship must be implemented is subjective. For example, in China, most of the content on the internet and television is regulated by the government. This increases hatred among the citizens toward the govt. Therefore only considerable regulation is required as in the case of the US. Here though the govt. is strict in classifying content into various categories it assigns certificates which guide the viewers. In other words, the government acts as a viewer discretionary ensemble which censors strident material and allows viewers to enjoy what they are entitled to.
Hence my belief is that moderate censorship has more than enough reasons and advantages to make it a conscientious choice.
