Censorship

[nemafakei]

There are some things that should not be pasted all over front pages of newspapres, there are some forms of media that need restriction, and there are some things that deserve to be destroyed. To a greater or lesser extent, I think we all can agree on this.

Personally, I would describe two dreadful things which I would like completely banned as degrading, tacky, and pointless. Their supporters occasionally try to pass them off as art, and as harmless fun; they say that people have the right to make such exhibitions of themselves. The evils that I want to see condemned are pantomime and pornography.

What are your thoughts? What do you think should and should not be allowed?

[ordos45]

I'd also agree with censoring pornography, for the sake of those underage or those whom do not enjoy such things. However, pantomime?

[Anathema]

So there's porn on the front page of some English newspapers ???

Seriously though, I agree about the porn thing.

[Dante]

Actually yes, there is.

I'm not sure about banned, after all everyone has their tastes. But it should be more... restricted. Except in the case of pantos. I rather enjoy them.

[nampigai]

pictures of dead people, I had a friend who's father die in a helicopter crash and they brought pics of it in the news both tv and papers. Such things sickens me.

[fremfedeliteNIAC]

^yea.. like when they showed the pictures of those british soldiers who were captured and shot in iraq and sky news and that were showing them being dragged around and stuff dead(originally shown on some iraqi station)

Actually yes, there is.

I'm not sure about banned, after all everyone has their tastes. But it should be more... restricted. Except in the case of pantos. I rather enjoy them.

well not nessacerily on the front page, more like third. but id have to say that pantos are more degrading ;D

[nampigai]

in order to show respect to the relatives they shouldn't show pictures of dead people. that's just my opinion

[Caid Ivik]

Censorship isn't needed. Gentle company will show only gentle pictures, boulevare everything. Visitor is who chooses the best, or the brightest.

[nampigai]

it's not only that, but showing pictures of cars with burned out people and a pic of a man who was stapped down and is lying under a white sheet. I just think it's disrespectfull. And people who wish to see this should get a time at their shrink or a job at the morgue

[gryphon]

Depends on the meaning you give to pornograpy. It if is just a girl in a string on the beach while the newspaper is running an article on the current heatwave I think that should be ok for example. besides that, I am not shure what kind of pornography Englisch newspapers are showing, although I might want a subscription on it .... ::)

And pictures about pantomime, a Dutch newspaper has the rule of not showing pictures in which people are having [ or had ] any form of pain [ inflicted unwillingly or with suffering ] on the front page.

I tend to agree with that.

[Caid Ivik]

National Geographic recently made a special issue about swimsuit. Reaction of a reader: Et tu, NG?

[Anathema]

in order to show respect to the relatives they shouldn't show pictures of dead people. that's just my opinion

But what about cases like say, Pim Fortuyn? He was a popular Dutch politician and got killed before the election. If people hear on their television or read in a paper that he's dead, they want to see his body so they can be sure of it.

[SurlyPIG]

Correct police procedure where I live is that neither name nor picture is released until the family has been notified. And the media over here almost never shows photos of dead bodies.

[nampigai]

but why should they need to see pictures to believe it? to satisfy themself? it's like when people drive by a car crash they stop up to see what happen and if there's any deads.

[Timenn]

It's the freedom of the media. Media shouldn't be restricted to all kinds of censorship. Censorship is evil, because you can not see what is being censored, and it is the start of corruption.

People have the right to let themselves been informed about everything.

Of course there are privacy rules, and no one has the right to publish certain information about you when you don't agree (unless you are someone of importance, who matters alot in society)

And to prevent that the wrong people are reading/watching/listening you can have age restrictions and things like what we have here in NL, named 'kijkwijzer' that shows if a movie has fowl language/violence/use of drugs/sex/discrimination/or scary scenes. And to what age it is fitted.

[Acriku]

It's sort of like when you finally kill the bad guy, but you want to make sure he's dead so he won't come back for a sequel.

[Timenn]

;D

Well, I think that is indeed the point. You can't believe it until you see it with your own eyes.

And such images are also showed to the people so that they show remorse. When I see horrible images of war, then I surely don't feel happy.

Better said: When you show such images to people, then you can make those people feel.

[Acriku]

I've been wondering why children aren't warned about, or protected from, the explicit parts of the bible?

[nampigai]

but what if you brother was killed, say stabbed to death and the next day the newspaper shows pics from the scene?

[ordos45]

I've been wondering why children aren't warned about, or protected from, the explicit parts of the bible?

I haven't heard of a child understanding if they read Song of Songs yet. As for the graphic content in Revelations, read that when I six.

[Timenn]

but what if you brother was killed, say stabbed to death and the next day the newspaper shows pics from the scene?

Well, I wouldn't know what to think of that. I wouldn't be busy with noticing that on that moment I think. And if people see that picture had mourn because of it, you may feel supported by other people.

IMO it is not important to show the violence, but to show the results of it.

Of course the pic shouldn't be very bloody or something like that, because that would show a bad perspective, something that doesn't fit, and then the picture would be bad in another way

[exatreide]

All censorship is evil and should be banned any one who suports bluring out art and destoying it is not a very good person...

Censorship=evil

evil=bad

bad=not good

not good =Ceonsorship

[quoudam72]

Define art give us a standard by which we must compare all other art. Censorship of art should be a given most art nowadays is garbage it is called art for art's sake. Combining two unrelated images just for shock value is not art.

[Acriku]

I've been wondering why children aren't warned about, or protected from, the explicit parts of the bible?

I haven't heard of a child understanding if they read Song of Songs yet. As for the graphic content in Revelations, read that when I six.

So lack of censoring has no effect on you?

[Caid Ivik]

I've just seen a videoclip of one duo, named "Julie", I think. One singer entered a house where one old niga with rasta-colored cap gave him something censored, creating a smoke. It looks like a joke. Censoring cigarettes with canabinoids?