The GAMSAT Essay Series... Censorship

As humans, we are constantly searching for new knowledge – whether that be in the ‘pure’ learning areas of the sciences, searching for the nature of black holes and puzzling out monkey behaviours, or in the more intimate areas of human nature like social circles and the reason behind our quest for knowledge in the first place. Regardless of the reason why we search, this search for knowledge is an important part of our humanity, what makes us who we are. Censorship, basically, is the knowing withholding of information from one human to another and is such a direct antithesis to this fundamental urge, which some dub ‘curiosity’.

In our gut instinct, even the very concept of censorship is abhorrent. Yet we se governments, corporations, heck, even the film agencies do it all the time. Every single movie released is rated – G, PG, or even R, where under-16s are simply not permitted to see it. Governments classify documents ‘sensitive’ or ‘top secret’, and do not allow their citizens to even know of their contents, or sometimes, of its existence.

So if most people would agree that the concept of censorship is bad, why is it still rife in what is really not that bad a society? Of course, one could take the hard line and expound numerous criticism of society today, but take the optimistic route and assume we’re not that bad. Why do we censor? Taking a step back from the automatic, righteous kneejerk reaction, we can see that there are some good things about censorship.

Our quest for knowledge is by nature eternally incomplete. We seize upon whatever knowledge is easiest to learn and nearby us in an effort to complete the puzzle of life. However, bad news is easier to come by – the media leaps on it, people are curious (and to some extent) more fascinate by bad news than good. Yet when that bad news becomes so prominent that it obscures the good news, or even stops people from digging further, perhaps that is when it should be censored. The censorship of R-rated movies is an example. Often containing bloody gore or sadistic, sexual themes, young children are barred from watching them because they have not yet experienced the deep rush of positive emotion and wellbeing that comes from a healthy (and – dare I say it – physical) relationship that may be eclipsed by a previous viewing of a violent rape scene.

Censorship allows the benevolent powers that be to guide their people’s thoughts along a more positive, constructive line that continually encourages their thirst for more information and doesn’t put them off or disgust them to the point where they cease to seek out more information, or makes them so opinionated that they refuse to consider other options.

But, of course, that would be in a perfect, utopian society. With all issues in our admittedly less-than-perfect society, though, things are not quite so easy or black and white. Governments have ulterior motives; things are censored not for the right reasons, and often, it is not clear-cut at all as to whether something should be censored. In the recent Wikileaks releases, for example, some of the details of the US dealings with its fellow UN countries revealed individual diplomats didn’t always get along with their international allies. Fair enough – we don’t always agree – but the tone set some brisling. For internal documents meant to be read by US eyes only, it was like a friend gossiping to her friend’s friend – mostly harmless, but not always appreciated and never setting a good tone for a fruitful relationship.

Although censorship does have its place in society, ultimately the ulterior motives of governments and the fact that it is so hard to decide what to show their people means that ultimately the best path for a country to take is with their gut instincts. As Frank Davison says, let the people themselves decide what they want to read, and remove censorship, although it may focus their attention on the wrong things.