"Censorship is rarely, if ever justified."

Censorship can be seen as the process of regulating the types of information that is disseminated to the public. The process of censorship is usually imposed by a higher authoritative power, usually a governmental body. Historically, it has been used by many societies like China and Israel as a tool to manage the moral and political lives of their citizens. The topic statement claims that censorship is rarely, if ever justified. However, there are both benefits and drawbacks to the imposition of censorship of which I shall analyze below.

In today's time and age, we are exposed to a multitude of information that advances in technology has to offer. Whether it is gleaning information from the myriad of literature that are available, or from mediums such as the television or the World Wide Web, we are exposed all sorts of information, useful and dangerous alike. Without censorship acting as a filter, there is no discretion of what information is being exposed, or to who it is exposed to. Nations could be overwhelmed by an influx of information that erodes cultural values. Young impressionable minds could be exposed to violent and sexual content. Teenagers surfing the Internet could pick up a formula to make a homemade bomb. Without censorship acting as a regulating factor, incorrect information could be passed on, spreading libel and slander which can potentially compromise the stability of a society. For example, news regarding sensitive racial issues could start a riot or a state of social unrest.

Though censorship can act as a healthy regulator of sensitive or dangerous information, it could also produce harmful effects. There are several factors that should be considered in regards to the issue of censorship. First, how does one decide what types are information are deem suitable for public knowledge and viewing? The process of evaluating the quality and appropriateness of information can be a subjective one. There are some knowledge that are inherently unsuitable for public knowledge, but there are also many types of information that fall into the gray area. This is perhaps most apparent in the artistic industry. Art is a subjective matter, and is the unique product of the artist alone. The use of sex, nudity and violence are always controversial. However, at what point does censorship act as a healthy filter and start overstepping the bounds on personal creativity and freedom of expression? Creativity and the generation of fresh ideas is what drives progress in a society, and the suppression of such expressions could lead to a stagnation and perpetuate unhealthy herd mentality.

As mentioned above, there have been instances in history and current where censorship has been used as a tool to regulate the moral and political lives of people. Censorship, used appropriately, can help maintain stability and control in a society. However, there are those take take censorship to higher level. Take for example the use of excessive censorship in Myanmar. Ruled by a harsh military regime for years, the government have taken to silencing any voices of dissent by any means, which have culminated in the recent shootings and arresting of monks protesting for democratic rights. Censorship is used as an excessive tool that impinges on the basic rights of its citizens. The government forces a very singular view on its citizens, which creates an environment of fear and suffering. It is very apparent that excessive censorship is unhealthy and acts as an impediment to democracy.

In sum, the use of censorship is not necessarily unjustified at all times. Censorship, if used appropriately can act as a filter of dangerous and sensitive information. However, excessive censorship can also suppress creativity and freedom of expression as well as impinge on basic human rights.