CENSORSHIP WITHIN THE UNITED STATES
The United States of America is beacon of liberty in the world. The country encourages the freedom of thought and expression. The country has one of the most robust bill of rights in the world. Individuals are aware of their freedoms and they are not afraid to take on the government to protest any form of abuse. However, the country does not allow the exercise of full speech without constraint. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution guaranteed the citizenry a right to free speech. All rights have some form of limits. The exercise of personal liberties by an individual should stop at the instance that it begins to interfere with the rights of another individual. For instance, people have the freedom of speech but it exercise should not lead to slander. The government uses the guise of the limitation of freedoms to enforce censorship.
The presumption censorship is that material produced from the freedom of speech might be dangerous or offensive to the public good. The exercise of censorship varies in context depending on the circumstances and the application of the law. Some of the most commonly censored items include films implied to contain graphic or excessive violence or those that reveal matters that need to be secret in the interest of national security. There are numerous methods of effecting censorship including the prevention of broadcast or publication. For instance, a radio station might make edits on songs considered to contain offensive connotations. The government may also prevent the media houses from sharing information that it considers as a threat the national security or stability.
However, any form of contravention to the Constitution of the United States can be subject to judicial review. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and any legislation or pronouncement by the executive arm of government should be in line with it . To that extent, the courts have the right to halt any attempts of censorship if it in contravention of the First Amendment. Therefore, the government needs to have compelling reasons in any attempt to interfere with the right . In some instances, the courts have sided with a bid by the government to exercise censorship. For example, the courts have agreed to censor the media in the past citing a scarcity in resources. In the past decades, the delivery of both the radio and television waves was only via radio waves. Therefore, there was a limitation in the number of frequencies available for broadcast. The courts agreed to impose sanctions on broadcast especially on content considered inappropriate or offensive.
The world is in the digital communication era. People have thousands of choices of media broadcast stations. In that regard, it is difficult for the government to exercise regulation on all the media avenues. The guise of a scarcity of broadcast frequencies is no longer an impediment to content creators. The regulatory institutions do not have compelling reasons to enforce censorship. In that regard, the most used phrase in the exercise of modern forms of censorship is the need to instill decency in broadcasted content. Even in the new age, censorship is still a reality and it continues to limit the freedoms of individuals.
In the last two decades, the internet has become the most useful source of information. Information is available on the internet in all media forms from numerous sources globally . Therefore, it is difficult for governments to censor the use of the internet . Nevertheless, there are several instances where the government has contravened the freedom of expression despite the challenge. Just like the other media avenues, the First Amendment right hinders direct censorship on the internet with the exception of child pornography. The government has made several attempts in the past to inhibit the sharing of obscenities on the internet through the Child Online Protection Act of 1998 and the Communications Decency Act of 1996 but the attempts failed. However, the government was successful in filtering internet content for children. The Federal government restricts the availability of content that it considers unsuitable for children in public facilities such as schools and libraries.
The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech and expression against all forms of interference by the government. The freedoms are an essential component of the American society and it enables the country to stand out amongst the League of Nations . To an extent, the United States of America serves as an example to other nations on how they should treat their citizenry and allow them to enjoy freedoms. Nevertheless, the exercise of the liberties should be cautious. Governments have a social contract with the citizenry to maintain the public good and protect the liberties for all. Therefore, in an attempt to secure the public good, the government may interfere with the freedom of speech of some individuals. The courts of law are available to check the excesses of governments in that regard.
Bibliography
Cardoso, V., Costa, J. L., Destounis, K., Hintz, P., & Jansen, A. (2018). Quasinormal modes and strong cosmic censorship. Physical review letters, 120(3), 031103.
de Albuquerque, A. (2019). Protecting democracy or conspiring against it? Media and politics in Latin America: A glimpse from Brazil. Journalism, 20(7), 906-923.
González-Quiñones, F., & Machin-Mastromatteo, J. D. (2019). On media censorship, freedom of expression and the risks of journalism in Mexico. Information Development, 35(4), 666-670.
Kirby, David A. “Regulating cinematic stories about reproduction: pregnancy, childbirth, abortion and movie censorship in the US, 1930–1958.” The British Journal for the History of Science 50, no. 3 (2017): 451-472.
Ng, A. H., Kermani, M. S., & Lalonde, R. N. (2019). Cultural differences in psychological reactance: Responding to social media censorship. Current Psychology, 1-10.
Nielsen, S. K., & Krogh, M. (2017). Spillover Censorship: The Globalization of US Corporate Music Self-Censorship. Popular Music and Society, 40(3), 345-362.
Pan, J. (2017). How market dynamics of domestic and foreign social media firms shape strategies of internet censorship. Problems of Post-Communism, 64(3-4), 167-188.
Yang, F. (2016). Rethinking China’s Internet censorship: The practice of recoding and the politics of visibility. New Media & Society, 18(7), 1364-1381.
