Is Censorship Ever Justified?

In 2024 access to information is easier than ever. However, the content that we end up seeing is influenced by censorship. Censorship is defined as the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security. The implementation of censorship is present across organizations such as schools, workplaces and governments, and is often justified as a measure to protect individuals. However, is the control over the content we consume ever justified? In my opinion: No, we as individuals should be able to control what information we see. 

Canada is a democracy where freedom of expression and speech is protected in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The content that we wish to see is up for personal preference. If certain information is blocked from our access our viewpoints and values can become one-sided. We have the right to choose our values and in turn, should be able to analyze all information available to us.

Another major issue with centrally enforced censorship is the classification of inappropriate material itself. The criteria for such material is different from person to person, making it difficult to make choices for an entire population. If a governing body were to implement censorship, would it censor material considered to be NSFW (Not safe for work) such as pornography or material/information with differing values from it? For example, content that contains values differing from that of the governing body may be at risk of being censored, which would reduce the diversity of perspectives. The misuse of the power of censorship is why a majority of people are against it. No governing party should be able to control the media or push a value on everyone. 

Finally, human nature is another reason why enforcing censorship is unsuccessful and unjustifiable. When something is left up for choice without any restriction, people often make the more rational decision. A study by Indiana University found that young adults are less likely to abuse alcohol if they grow up in or are surrounded by an alcohol-tolerant environment than those in one restrictive of it.  This same principle can be applied to censorship: if a person is told that they aren’t allowed to access a certain book or article they may go out of their way to get a hold of it. Often,“forbidden Fruit is the sweetest”, meaning people get a thrill out of gaining access to restricted information as they believe they are “beating the system”. 

To conclude, the idea of centralized censorship appears to be advantageous in theory as it promotes the protection of citizens. However, in practice, it raises more issues than solutions as it narrows perspectives and diversity of viewpoints. Individuals should be able to make their own decisions when it comes to what media they choose to consume and form their own opinions on issues.