Censorship-is it Right or Wrong?

Kyle Karim

The issue of censorship always provides an interesting debate. There are many intelligent and very valid arguments for and against the issue. However I strongly believe that the act of censorship is wrong.

I believe that all films, songs and television programs should be released uncut from any government or senior authority intervention. A film or piece of music is a work of art, thus it should be marketed as its creator intended. Because of this the cutting of a film or censoring of a song is the same as the mutilation of a painting or an act of vandalism.

Indeed musicians are often referred to as artists and this especially true of those that right there own music, it reflects their emotions and feeling and who has the right to censor someone’s feelings, past and emotions.

In the case of films censorship is widely used as a marketing ploy. The largest market for cinemas is the 14-17 age group. Therefore by editing a possible 18 rated film down to a 15 it stands better chance of being big at the box office, thus making it more money. This is made more probable by the fact that in Britain cuts are agreed between the British Board of Film Classification and the distributor-not the writer or director! I understand that is not suitable for an 11 yr old to watch a film with a large sexual content but instead of cutting these scenes out to allow that age group to see it, it should be left to the appropriate age to view. i.e. (certificate 18) The BBFC is fully aware that if a film is given an 18 certificate than some 16 and 17 yr olds will see it and if a 15 certificate is awarded to a film some 14 and 13 yr olds will see it, and certify the films with this in mind. So in essence they are certifying it for a 16 and 13 yr old-I classify this as an exceedingly ill considered and rash action. In the current system it is the cinema managers job to oversee that the correct age group do attend these films and not the job of a censoring committee to make sure the film is suitable for any age group.

I think it is extremely important to note that most film festivals in the world require no censorship- it is un-arguable that some of the most individual and compelling movies never make it out of there because of the writers, producers and directors rightful unwillingness to allow some would be censors to tamper with their message and their art

This is a preview of the whole essay

In the case of videos just because some parents cannot or will not be responsible for the welfare of their children does not mean that we should suffer. The majority of parents are responsible and know something about how their child’s mind works and take it upon themselves to make sure that they know the difference between the world of film and the real world. They also censor the movies their children watch themselves. The children that’s parents choose not to take an interest in there life and what they are watching and doing in their spare time have much deeper and more serious issues that will not be solves by the banning or cutting of films.

On top of this two thirds of households in this country do not contain someone under the age of 16, I therefore think it is naïve to ban a form of art merely because it might be taken into one of the other third. After all videos do not walk into houses by themselves.

Normal people over the age of about seven can tell the difference between the imaginary fictional worlds on films and the real world, in which we live. I find it almost impossible to believe that anyone else who claims that a work of fiction has influenced them to the point that they have been influenced into repeating it or been genuinely affected by it isn’t either mentally ill, mentally handicapped or lying. Therefore to ban a film because it affected a mentally ill person is to treat the whole country as though they were sick.

I think that by taking away censorship or at least loosening its guidelines would force parents and people to think more intelligently about what they have seen and actually think about the message behind the films and music instead of how so and so escaped the monster. I think to suggest, as many pro-censorship groups do, that because some children watch telly all hours of the day and night, telly all day and night should be suitable for children is a very negative action and is encouraging the irresponsible attitude of ‘dump the kids in front of the telly’.

In rectifying the situation I would first use the certification system as only a guideline for anything over the certificate of 12. Thus meaning that it is up to a 15 yr old, or their parents, to decide whether they want to watch a film of a violent nature. After all every video player has a stop and an eject button. I would also, like many European countries have already, make the watershed later, but after the watershed anything goes-no censoring.

Art should not target a major market, it’s the monotonous constant Hollywood ‘blockbusters’ that do so. Real art with a real moving message should not be tampered with it should be offered to the world unexpurgated and uncut.

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’

Thus making censorship an absolute breach of ones human right.

Unfortunately, this world is not safe, censored or kind. It consists of murderers, rapists, and some intensely sick people. Why should we be forced to have our artists and our creative people’s thoughts feelings idea’s and emotions of the world culled and conformed to make sure its ‘safe’?