Is censoring a word

Terms that sound identical and also have similar meanings can be difficult to manage. The words «censor» and «censure» are examples of such terms. But when you throw in one more term into the mix, things get even more confusing.

«Censure» means «to reprimand». «Censor» is removing «offensive», «obscene» aspects from a piece of work meant for public consumption. And «sensor» denotes any piece of tech built into cameras, detectors, etc. «Censure» and «censor» work as both nouns and verbs in texts. «Sensor» is primarily a noun.

If you’d like to learn more about the differences between the three words, how to use them in various writing contexts, and more, continue reading.

«Censure» – Definition

The term «censure» means to «officially denounce» or «speak against someone». It’s basically «official displeasure» or «formal rebuke». An individual can be «censured» for their actions or even their words. The term «censure», and also «censor», come from «censere», a Latin term that means «judge» or «appraise».

The synonyms or related words for «censure» include:

• criticize
• reprehend
• reprobate
• denounce
• condemn

Unlike the above words, however, «censure» implies «authority» and «reprimanding». It invariably denotes «official action».

«Censor» – Definition

«Censoring» or «to censor» a piece of writing or speech is «suppressing inappropriate work» so that it doesn’t become available to the public in its «raw» form. Bleeping «expletives» or «obscenities» on national television is a form of censoring broadcasters resort to. Not to mention, the noun «censorship» is based on «censor».

According to The Free Dictionary by Farlex, the term «censor» originally served as a noun, referring to «magistrates overseeing and upholding moral standards». Over a period, the word evolved to mean an individual or entity with authority to examine different forms of media, such as movies, books, plays, etc., and clean up or quash obscene, vulgar, or any other form of objectionable content.

A «censor» is typically a body or entity instituted and/or governed by the state. The body consists of individuals who have the government’s permission to read publications, watch movies or theatrical performances, etc., before they are made public.

As they are set in place by the ruling government, they usually tend to adhere to the state’s requirements or expectations. If a movie or book consists of something that’s not deemed «acceptable» by the state, the piece of work is likely to be censored heavily or not allowed to be released at all.

«Sensor» – Definition

A «sensor» is any device that measures or detects a physical property and indicates, documents, or responds to the thing. Digital cameras have sensors built in them, for instance, which help snap images and record videos. Metal detectors also have sensors. Not to mention, the noun «sensor» comes from «sense». The term is derived from the Latin word «sentire», which means «to feel».

Most modern-day sensors are «digital», producing data for subsequent computer processing. Analog sensors, however, exist too. The sensors used in smoke detectors, for instance, are analog. The sensor found in the detector is radioactive material positioned between a couple of electrically charged plates.

The arrangement helps ionize the air, causing current flow between the two plates. When smoke penetrates the chamber, the light gets reflected onto the sensor, causing the alarm to trigger. The motion detectors used to automatically open public building doors also employ analog sensors.

Using «Censure», «Censor», and «Sensor» in Texts

The words «censure» and «censor» can be used as a verb or a noun in writings. «Sensor» is typically used as a noun in sentences.

When used as a verb, «censor» means to examine a particular thing and remove portions of it perceived to be «inappropriate», «offensive», etc.

• Tim’s job was censoring cuss words on television shows.

The following sentence employs «censor» as a noun:

• The beach censors were found arresting scantily clad women.

Like «censor», «censure» can also be employed as a noun or a verb. When employed as a verb, «censure» means «to criticize or speak out against something». The word is invariably used formally and not so much in casual conversations.

• The judge censured him for his careless behavior.

When incorporated as a noun, the word denotes «official criticism». A «censure» is usually a component of punishment.

• He received censure from his manager for checking out Instagram at work.
• If she gets another censure, she will lose her job.

The term «sensor» is almost always used as a noun. Example sentences mentioned below illustrate the point.

Similarities and the Ensuing Confusion Between «Censure», «Censor», and «Sensor»

The three words «censure», «censor», and «sensor» sound almost identical when pronounced, and they have relatively similar spellings too. This tends to cause confusion when using the words in sentences, particularly when trying to choose between «censor» and «sensor».

Errors entailing «censure» or incorrectly using the word in place of «censor» or «sensor» are comparatively rare. This is because «censure» has a slight yet distinct difference in pronunciation compared to «censor» and «sensor».

The words «censor» and «sensor» are pronounced as «SEN-ser». «Censure», on the other hand, is pronounced as «SEN-shire», which rhymes with «sure».

About their meanings, «censor» and «censure» are similar to each other. A «censor» basically cuts or hides information considered «offensive», «harsh», or «obscene». A «censure», on the flip side, deals with «harsh criticism». Both entail assessing, judging, and/or reflecting on other’s work.

When a piece of work is not «censored» properly or is out for the general public to consume, the «censor» is likely to be «censured».

Kindly note, «censer» and «censor» are not the same, or they do not belong to different dialects of English. «Censer» is a valid word and not a misspelling of «censor». It denotes «incense burners» used in a church.

Distinguishing Between «Censure», «Censor», and «Sensor»

The key to differentiating the three terms from each other is focusing on their roots and meanings. As mentioned above, «sensor» is derived from «sense». If the word to be used has to do with «sensing», «sensor» is likely the word. If not, use «censor».

Think of the term «census» for «censure» and «censor». All of the three begin with «c». If you’re having trouble drawing the line between «censure» and «censor», focus on the suffixes. In other words, the «-or» in the word «censor» denotes an individual or entity that resorts to certain actions. Most importantly, only «censor» can be used to denote a person.

The «-ure» in the term «censure», on the other hand, denotes the outcome of an act that aligns with the meaning of that word, which is «a kind of punishment».

Example Sentences with the Word «Censure»

Here is a list of sentences that use «censure» to good effect:

• If you want to become famous and loved, you should be ready for censure too.
• The fear of censure is a sign you will not make it big.
• The commandant had written them three letters of censure.
• To avoid being censured by others, self-correcting whenever possible is imperative.
• Following the review, the commission concluded no censure was needed.
• After the censuring, the professor was seriously contemplating early retirement.
• He was not censured or punished for his alleged role in the scandal.
• The board censured the manager but did not dismiss him.

Example Sentences with the Word «Censor»

The following are sentences with the word «censor» and the different inflections of the term. As mentioned above, «censorship’ has its roots in «censor», and, therefore, a sentence or two incorporating the word could be included below.

• Unlike nudity, violence in films is not as heavily criticized or censored.
• She speaks her mind without any filter or censor.
• The censor deleted multiple paragraphs from the book.
• Unlike movies, museums do not have official censorships.
• History is proof that efforts to censor communication at a macro level never succeed.
• The film was never released outside its home country, thanks to the state’s censor board.
• The book was censored heavily during its initial release, only to be republished in its original avatar a year later.
• It was only later found out that the upper management heavily censored the employee’s reports.
• The director was not in favor of a small group of random people censoring his movie.
• The government has censored all files containing information on aliens.
• Despite many countries’ attempts to censor the work, it still turned out to be a roaring success worldwide.

Example Sentences with the Word «Sensor»

The following are sentences incorporating the word «sensor»:

• To prevent crime, better and more surveillance cameras and sensors must be instituted.
• The infrared sensor was devised to detect movement.
• The clothing company makes shirts with built-in sensors.
• Almost all smartphones come with sensors, which determine how bright the screens should get in relation to their environment or how they are used.
• Electromagnetic radiation caused disruptions in the spacecraft’s sensor.
• The security system has a network of motion and heat sensors that help detect intruders.
• Modern airplanes are automated in large part, courtesy of the many advanced sensors built in them.

Conclusion

«Censor» and «sensor» are homonyms, and they are likely to create confusion among many writers. The term «censure», on the other hand, has a slightly different sound and unique spelling too, which reduces the chances of getting the word mixed up with «sensor» or «censor».

But there is still room for confusion with «censure», and it’s, therefore, imperative to address the same. You don’t want to «censor» somebody when the objective was to «censure» them.

Asked by: Elvie Prohaska

Score: 4.4/5
(24 votes)

One that condemns or censures.

What does it mean for a person to be censored?

If someone in authority censors letters or the media, they officially examine them and cut out any information that is regarded as secret.

What censer means?

: a vessel for burning incense especially : a covered incense burner swung on chains in a religious ritual.

What does non censored mean?

a : not having any part deleted or suppressed an uncensored version of the film. b : not subject to a censor’s examination uncensored email.

What is censorship Webster dictionary?

1a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring They oppose government censorship. b : the actions or practices of censors especially : censorial control exercised repressively censorship that has …

19 related questions found

Part of a series on
Freedom
By concept
Philosophical freedom Political freedom Economic freedom Liberty
By form
Academic Assembly Association Body: clothing, modifying From government Movement Press Religion and beliefs Speech Thought
Other
Censorship Coercion Human rights Indices Media transparency Negative liberty Positive liberty Self-ownership

Censorship is the editing, removing, or otherwise changing speech and other forms of human expression. In some cases, it is exercised by governing bodies but it is always and continuously carried out by the mass media. The visible motive of censorship is often to stabilize, improve, or persuade the societal group that the censoring organization would have control over. It is most commonly applied to acts that occur in public circumstances, and most formally involves the suppression of ideas by criminalizing or regulating expression. Discussion of censorship often includes less formal means of controlling perceptions by excluding various ideas from mass communication. What is censored may range from specific words to entire concepts and it may be influenced by value systems; but the most common reasons for censoring («omitting») information are the particular interests of the distribution companies of news and entertainment, their owners, and their commercial and political connections.

While humankind remains self-centered and unable to develop a world of peace and harmonious relationships for all, censorship continues to be controversial yet necessary. Restricting freedom of speech violates the foundation of democracy, yet the imposition of offensive material on the public also violates their rights. Governments should not hide important information from their citizens, yet the public release of sensitive military or other materials endangers those citizens should such material fall into the hands of enemies.

Etymology

«Censorship» comes from the Latin word censor. In Rome, the censor had two duties: To count the citizens and to supervise their morals. The term «census» is also derived from this word.

An early published reference to the term «whitewash» dates back to 1762 in a Boston Evening Post article. In 1800, the word was used publicly in a political context, when a Philadelphia Aurora editorial said that «if you do not whitewash President Adams speedily, the Democrats, like swarms of flies, will bespatter him all over, and make you both as speckled as a dirty wall, and as black as the devil.»^[1]

The word «sanitization» is a euphemism commonly used in the political context of propaganda to refer to the doctoring of information that might otherwise be perceived as incriminating, self-contradictory, controversial, or damaging. Censorship, as compared to acts or policies of sanitization, more often refers to a publicly set standard, not a privately set standard. However, censorship is often alleged when an essentially private entity, such as a corporation, regulates access to information in a communication forum that serves a significant share of the public. Official censorship might occur at any jurisdictional level within a state or nation that otherwise represents itself as opposed to formal censorship.

Selected global history

Censorship has occurred all over the world, and has been evident since recorded history in numerous societies. As noted, the word «censor» derives from the Roman duty to supervise the morals of the public.

Great Britain

One of the earliest known forms of censorship in Great Britain was the British Obscenity Laws. The conviction in 1727 of Edmund Curll for the publication of Venus in the Cloister or The Nun in her Smock under the common law offense of disturbing the King’s peace was the first conviction for obscenity in Great Britain, and set a legal precedent for other convictions.^[2]British copyright laws also gave the Crown the permission to license publishing. Without government approval, printing was not allowed. For a court or other governmental body to prevent a person from speaking or publishing before the act has taken place is sometimes called prior restraint, which may be viewed as worse than punishment received after someone speaks, as in libel suits.

Russia

The Russian Empire had a branch within the government devoted to censorship (among other tasks) known as the Third Section of His Imperial Majesty’s Own Chancellery. The Third Section and Gendarmes became associated primarily with the suppression of any liberal ideas as well as strict censorship on printed press and theater plays. Although only three periodicals were ever banned outright, most were severely edited. It was keen to repress «dangerous» western liberal ideas, such as constitutional monarchy or even republicanism. Throughout the reign of Nicholas I, thousands of citizens were kept under strict surveillance.

Soviet Union

The Soviet Union also later engaged in censorship as Lenin believed literature and art could be used for ideological and political purposes.^[3] Under the Soviet regime there were a number of organizations responsible for censorship. The Main Administration for Safeguarding State Secrets in the Press (also known as Glavlit) was in charge of censoring all publications and broadcasting for state secrets. There was also Goskomizdat, Goskino, Gosteleradio, and Goskomstat, which were in charge of censoring television, film, radio, and printed matter.

United States

During World War II, The American Office of Censorship, an emergency wartime agency, heavily censored reporting. On December 19, 1941, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8985, which established the Office of Censorship and conferred on its director the power to censor international communications in «his absolute discretion.» However, the censorship was not limited to reporting. «Every letter that crossed international or U.S. territorial borders from December 1941 to August 1945 was subject to being opened and scoured for details.»^[4]

East Germany

Following World War II, the Soviet controlled East Germany censored anything it could. Censors scrutinized manuscripts for their socialist ideology and recommended changes to the author if necessary. Afterwards, the whole work was again analyzed for ideology hostile to the current government by a committee of the publishing company. There existed two official government arms for censorship: Hauptverwaltung Verlage und Buchhandel (HV), and the Bureau for Copyright (Büro für Urheberrechte). The HV determined the degree of censorship and the way of publishing and marketing the work. The Bureau for Copyright appraised the work, and then decided if the publication would be allowed to be published in foreign countries as well as the GDR, or only in the GDR.

Iran

Modern Iran practices a good deal of censorship over the printed press and the internet.^[5] With the election of Iranian president Mohammad Khatami, and the start of the 2nd of Khordad Reform Movement, a clampdown occurred that only worsened after the election of conservative president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005. Iran is now considered to be one of the most repressive Internet-censorship regimes in the world. Many bloggers, online activists, and technical staff have faced jail terms, harassment, and abuse. In November 2006, Iran was one of 13 countries labeled «enemies of the internet» by activist group Reporters Without Borders.^[6] The government of Iran required all Iranians to register their web sites with the Ministry of art and culture.

Subject matter

The rationale for censorship is different for various types of data censored. These are the main types:

Educational censorship

The content of school textbooks is often the issue of debate, since their target audience is young people, and the term «whitewashing» is the one commonly used to refer to selective removal of critical or damaging evidence or comment. The reporting of military atrocities in history is extremely controversial, as in the case of the Nanking Massacre, the Holocaust, and the Winter Soldier Investigation of the Vietnam War. The representation of every society’s flaws or misconduct is typically downplayed in favor of a more nationalist, favorable, or patriotic view.

In the context of secondary-school education, the way facts and history are presented greatly influences the interpretation of contemporary thought, opinion, and socialization. One argument for censoring the type of information disseminated is based on the inappropriate quality of such material for the young. The use of the «inappropriate» distinction is in itself controversial, as it can lead to a slippery slope enforcing wider and more politically-motivated censorship.

Moral censorship

Moral censorship is the means by which any material that contains what the censor deems to be of questionable morality is removed. The censoring body disapproves of what it deems to be the values behind the material and limits access to it. Pornography, for example, is often censored under this rationale. In another example, graphic violence resulted in the censorship of the 1932 «culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant» movie entitled Scarface originally completed in 1930.

Military censorship

Military censorship is the process of keeping military intelligence and tactics confidential and away from the enemy. This is used to counter espionage, which is the process of gleaning military information. Additionally, military censorship may involve a restriction on information or media coverage that can be released to the public, such as in Iraq, where the U.S. government has restricted the photographing or filming of dead soldiers or their caskets and its subsequent broadcast in the U.S. This is done to avoid public reaction similar to that which occurred during the Vietnam War or the Iran Hostage Crisis.

In wartime, explicit censorship is carried out with the intent of preventing the release of information that might be useful to an enemy. Typically it involves keeping times or locations secret, or delaying the release of information (such as an operational objective) until it is of no possible use to enemy forces. The moral issues here are often seen as somewhat different, as release of tactical information usually presents a greater risk of casualties among one’s own forces and could possibly lead to loss of the overall conflict. During World War I, letters written by British soldiers would have to go through the process of being censored. This consisted of officers going through letters with a black marker and crossing out anything which might compromise operational secrecy before the letter was sent. The World War II catchphrase «Loose lips sink ships» was used as a common justification to exercise official wartime censorship and encourage individual restraint when sharing potentially sensitive information.

Political censorship

Political censorship occurs when governments conceal secrets from their citizens. The logic is to prevent the free expression needed to revolt. Democracies do not officially approve of political censorship but often endorse it privately. Any dissent against the government is thought to be a “weakness” for the enemy to exploit. Campaign tactics are also often kept secret, leading to events such as the Watergate scandal.

A well-known example of sanitization policies comes from the USSR under Stalin, where publicly used photographs were often altered to remove people whom Stalin had condemned to execution. Though past photographs may have been remembered or kept, this deliberate and systematic alteration of history in the public mind is seen as one of the central themes of Stalinism and totalitarianism. More recently, the official exclusion of television crews from locales where coffins of military dead were in transit has been cited as a form of censorship. This particular example obviously represents an incomplete or failed form of censorship, as numerous photographs of these coffins have been printed in newspapers and magazines.

Religious censorship

Religious censorship is the means by which any material objectionable to a certain faith is removed. This often involves a dominant religion forcing limitations on less dominant ones. Alternatively, one religion may shun the works of another when they believe the content is not appropriate for their faith.

Also, some religious groups have at times attempted to block the teaching of evolution in schools, as evolutionary theory appears to contradict their religious beliefs. The teaching of sex education in school and the inclusion of information about sexual health and contraceptive practices in school textbooks is another area where suppression of information occurs.

Corporate censorship

Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to halt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light. Privately owned corporations in the «business» of reporting the news also sometimes refuse to distribute information due to the potential loss of advertiser revenue or shareholder value which adverse publicity may bring.

Implementation

Censorship can be explicit, as in laws passed to prevent select positions from being published or propagated (such as the People’s Republic of China, Saudi Arabia, Germany, Australia, and the United States), or it can be implicit, taking the form of intimidation by government, where people are afraid to express or support certain opinions for fear of losing their jobs, their position in society, their credibility, or their lives. The latter form is similar to McCarthyism and is prevalent in a number of countries, including the United States.

Through government action

Censorship is regarded among a majority of academics in the Western world as a typical feature of dictatorships and other authoritarian political systems. Democratic nations are represented, especially among Western government, academic, and media commentators, as having somewhat less institutionalized censorship, and as instead promoting the importance of freedom of speech. The former Soviet Union maintained a particularly extensive program of state-imposed censorship. The main organ for official censorship in the Soviet Union was the Chief Agency for Protection of Military and State Secrets, generally known as the Glavlit, its Russian acronym. The Glavlit handled censorship matters arising from domestic writings of just about any kind—even beer and vodka labels. Glavlit censorship personnel were present in every large Soviet publishing house or newspaper; the agency employed some 70,000 censors to review information before it was disseminated by publishing houses, editorial offices, and broadcasting studios. No mass medium escaped Glavlit’s control. All press agencies and radio and television stations had Glavlit representatives on their editorial staffs.

Some thinkers understand censorship to include other attempts to suppress points of view or the exploitation of negative propaganda, media manipulation, spin, disinformation or «free speech zones.» These methods tend to work by disseminating preferred information, by relegating open discourse to marginal forums, and by preventing other ideas from obtaining a receptive audience.

Suppression of access to the means of dissemination of ideas can function as a form of censorship. Such suppression has been alleged to arise from the policies of governmental bodies, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the United States of America, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC in Canada, newspapers that refuse to run commentary the publisher disagrees with, lecture halls that refuse to rent themselves out to a particular speaker, and individuals who refuse to finance such a lecture. The omission of selected voices in the content of stories also serves to limit the spread of ideas, and is often called censorship. Such omission can result, for example, from persistent failure or refusal by media organizations to contact criminal defendants (relying solely on official sources for explanations of crime). Censorship has been alleged to occur in such media policies as blurring the boundaries between hard news and news commentary, and in the appointment of allegedly biased commentators, such as a former government attorney, to serve as anchors of programs labeled as hard news but comprising primarily anti-criminal commentary.

In the media

The focusing of news stories to exclude questions that might be of interest to some audience segments, such as the avoidance of reporting cumulative casualty rates among citizens of a nation that is the target or site of a foreign war, is often described as a form of censorship. Favorable representation in news or information services of preferred products or services, such as reporting on leisure travel and comparative values of various machines instead of on leisure activities such as arts, crafts, or gardening has been described by some as a means of censoring ideas about the latter in favor of the former.

Self censorship is censorship imposed on the media in a free market by market or cultural forces rather than a censoring authority. This may occur when it is more profitable for the media to give a biased view. Examples would include near hysterical and scientifically untenable stances against nuclear power, genetic engineering, and recreational drugs being distributed because scare stories sell.

Overcoming censorship

Since the invention of the printing press, distribution of limited production leaflets has often served as an alternative to dominant information sources. Technological advances in communication, such as the Internet, have overcome some censorship. Throughout history, mass protests have also served as a method for resisting unwanted impositions.

Censorship in literature

Censorship through government action is taken to a ridiculous extent and lampooned in the Ray Bradbury novel Fahrenheit 451. The book revolves around the adventure of a «fireman» whose job is to burn books, because the only permitted educational outlet for people in his dystopian society is state controlled television. The novel’s society has strongly anti-intellectual overtones, which Bradbury was attempting to prevent.

Censorship also figures prominently in George Orwell’s novel 1984. That novel’s main character works for the «Ministry of Truth,» which is responsible for disseminating the state’s version of current events and history. Smith’s position requires him to edit history books to keep them in line with the prevailing political mood. Also prominent in the book are the «Thought Police» who arrest and punish citizens who even entertain subversive thoughts. 1984 also highlights the common connection between censorship and propaganda.

Censorship and Society

Censorship presents a danger to an open, democratic world. Most countries claiming to be democratic abide by some standard of publicly releasing materials that are not security risks. This promotes an atmosphere of trust and participation in government, which is a healthier state than the suspicion experienced by those forced to live under censorious, unfree regimes. Freedom of speech has come to be seen as a hallmark of a modern society, with pressures for emerging countries to adopt such standards. Modernizing pressure has forced the opening of many formerly closed societies, such as Russia and China.^[7]

Despite its many disreputable uses, censorship also serves a more benign end. Many argue that censorship is necessary for a healthy society and in some cases may be for the protection of the public. One such example is in the broadcasting of explicit material, be it violent or sexual in nature. While it may be argued that broadcasters should be free to broadcast such items, equally, parents should also be free to have their children watch television without the fear that they will see inappropriate material. To this end, societies have developed watchdog agencies to determine decency regulations. In America, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) serves this purpose. Two famous recent cases involving the FCC are the broadcasting of nudity during the Super Bowl and of the unedited Steven Spielberg move Saving Private Ryan. In the first case, the FCC levied great fines on Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) for broadcasting a slip of nudity.^[8] In the second case, the FCC warned that fines could be forthcoming if the ABC stations aired the violent film uncut.^[9]

Another benign use of censorship is that of information that is secret for national security purposes. Governments maintain a level of secrecy in regards to much pertaining to the national defense so as not to reveal weaknesses to any security risks. Determining the balance between transparent government and safe government is a difficult task. In the United States, there exist a series of «sunshine laws» that require making available to the public government documents once they are no longer vital to national security.

Notes

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Abbott, Randy. «A Critical Analysis of the Library-Related Literature Concerning Censorship in Public Libraries and Public School Libraries in the United States During the 1980s» in Project for degree of Education Specialist. University of South Florida, 1987.
• Burress, Lee. Battle of the Books. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1989.
• Butler, Judith. Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative. 1997. ISBN 0415915872
• Foucault, Michel. Philosophy, Culture: interviews and other writings 1977-1984. New York/London: Routledge, 1988. ISBN 0415900824
• Hansen, Terry. The Missing Times: News media complicity in the UFO cover-up. 2000. ISBN 0738836125
• Hendrikson, Leslie. «Library Censorship: ERIC Digest No. 23» in ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education. Boulder, Colorado, 1985.
• Hoffman, Frank. Intellectual Freedom and Censorship. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1989. ISBN 0810821451
• Marek, Kate. Schoolbook Censorship USA. 1987.
• Misiroglu, Gina. The Handy American Government Answer Book: How Washington, Politics and Elections Work. Visible Ink Press, 2017. ISBN 978-1578596393
• O’Reilly, Robert C. and Larry Parker. 1982. «Censorship or Curriculum Modification?» Paper presented at a School Boards Association, 1982.
• Small, Robert C. «Preparing the New English Teacher to Deal with Censorship, or Will I Have to Face it Alone?.» Annual Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, 1987.
• Terry, John David II. «Censorship: Post Pico» in School Law Update, 1986.
• World Book Encyclopedia, volume 3 (C-Ch), pages 345, 346.

Definitions For Censoring

noun

• Deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances
• Counterintelligence achieved by banning or deleting any information of value to the enemy
• A person who examines books, movies, letters, etc., and removes things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc.

verb

• To examine books, movies, letters, etc., in order to remove things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc.

English International (SOWPODS)
YES

Points in Different Games

Scrabble

Words with Friends

The word Censoring is worth 12 points in Scrabble and 16 points in Words with Friends

Examples of Censoring in a Sentence

• Government censors deleted all references to the protest.
• The station censored her speech before broadcasting it.
• His report was heavily censored.

Synonyms for Censoring

The term censorship refers to the suppression, banning, or deletion of speech, writing, or images that are considered to be indecent, obscene, or otherwise objectionable. Censorship becomes a civil rights issue when a government or other entity with authority, suppresses ideas, or the expression of ideas, information, and self. In the U.S., censorship has been debated for decades, as some seek to protect the public from offensive materials, and others seek to protect the public’s rights to free speech and expression. To explore this concept, consider the following censorship definition.

Definition of Censorship

Noun

1. The act of censoring
2. The office or authority of a censor

Origin

380 B.C.          Greek Philosopher Plato

What is Censorship

The word censorship is from the Latin censere, which is “to give as one’s opinion, to assess.” In Roman times, censors were public officials who took census counts, as well as evaluating public principles and moralities. Societies throughout history have taken on the belief that the government is responsible for shaping the characters of individuals, many engaging in censorship to that end.

In his text The Republic, ancient Greek philosopher Plato makes a systematic case for the need for censorship in the arts. Information in the ancient Chinese society was tightly controlled, a practice that persists in some form today. Finally, many churches, including the Roman Catholic Church, have historically banned literature felt to be contrary to the teachings of the church.

Censorship in America

Many of America’s laws have their origins in English law. In the 1700s, both countries made it their business to censor speech and writings concerning sedition, which are actions promoting the overthrowing of the government, and blasphemy, which is sacrilege or irreverence toward God. The idea that obscenity should be censored didn’t gain serious favor until the mid-1800s. The courts in both countries, throughout history, have worked to suppress speech, writings, and images on these issues.

As time went on, contention arose over just what should be considered “obscene.” Early English law defined obscenity as anything that tended to “deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences,” and anything that “might suggest to the minds of the young of either sex, and even to persons of more advanced years, thoughts of a most impure and libidinous character.” This essentially meant anything that might lead one to have “impure” thoughts. This definition carried over into early American law as well.

However, that definition was vague enough to raise more questions than it answered in many circumstances. These included:

• Should adults have a right to read or view “adult materials?”
• When does one legally become an adult?
• Should adult materials be banned simply because a young person might see them?
• How would a court judge whether a particular book, when read by a young person, would cause “impure” thoughts?

Censorship in America took a turn in 1957, when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that adults cannot be reduced to reading “only what is fit for children,” ruling that it must be considered whether the work was originally meant for children or adults. Still, the Court acknowledged that works that are “utterly without redeeming social importance” can be censored or banned. This left another vague standard for the courts to deal with.

Censorship in America is most commonly a question in the entertainment industry, which is widely influential on the young and old alike. Public entertainment in the form of movies, television, music, and electronic gaming are considered to have a substantial effect on public interest. Because of this, it is subject to certain governmental regulations.

Censorship and the First Amendment

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits suppression of an individual’s right to free speech, stating “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …” This is a principle held dear by those protesting censorship in any form. In the U.S., censorship of obscene materials in entertainment is allowed, in order to protect children from pornography and other offensive things. The problem with government sanctioned censorship is the risk of violating the civil rights of either those producing the materials, or those wishing to view them.

Censorship Example in the Film Industry

The issue of censorship in the film industry has, at times, been quite contentious. In an effort to avoid the censorship issue, while striving to protect children and conform to federal laws, the Motion Picture Association of America (“MPAA”) instituted a self-regulating, voluntary rating system in 1968. In the 1990s, the MPAA updated its rating system, making it easier for parents to determine what is appropriate for their children, based on the children’s ages.

The MPAA rating system has a number of ratings:

Rating	Long Title	Definition
G	General Audiences	All ages admitted. Nothing that would offend parents for viewing by children.
PG	Parental Guidance Suggested	Some material may not be suitable for children. Parents urged to give “parental guidance.” May contain some material parents might not like for their young children.
PG-13	Parents Strongly Cautioned	Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. Parents are urged to be cautious. Some material may be inappropriate for pre-teenagers.
R	Restricted	Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian. Contains some adult material. Parents are urged to learn more about the film before taking their young children with them.
NC-17	Adults Only	No One 17 and Under Admitted. Clearly adult. Children are not admitted.

Rather than censoring movies or their content by exclusion of content, MCAA ratings are assigned by a board of people who view the movies, who consider such factors as violence, sex, drug use, and language when assigning ratings. The board strives to assign a rating that a majority of parents in the U.S. would give, considering their needs to protect their children.

An X rating was part of the MCAA’s original rating system, and signified that no one under the age of 16 would be allowed, regardless of parental accompaniment. The X rating was replaced by the NC-17 rating in 1990.

Internet Censorship

Internet censorship refers to the suppression of information that can be published to, or viewed on, the internet. While many people enjoy unfettered access to the broad spectrum of information racing across the information highway, others are denied access, or allowed access only to government approved information. Rationales for internet censorship range from a desire to protect children from content that is offensive or inappropriate, to a government’s objective to control its people’s access to world news, opinions, and other information.

In the United States, the First Amendment affords the people some protection of their right to freely access the internet, and of the things they post to the web. Because of this, there is very little government-mandated “filtering” of information that originates in the U.S. The issue of censorship of certain content, especially content that may further terrorism, is constantly debated at the federal government level.

As an example of censorship, the following countries are known for censoring their people’s internet content:

• North Korea – only about 4% of the people have access to the internet, and the only content allowed is government-controlled.
• Burma – the government filters the people’s emails, and blocks access to any sites or information exposing human rights violations in the country.
• Saudi Arabia – the government blocks nearly half a million websites, especially those that discuss religious, social, or political topics that conflict with the beliefs of the monarchy.
• Iran – the government censors information coming into, and going out of, the nation. Bloggers are required to register with the Ministry of Art and Culture. Any who express opinions contrary to those of the governmental leaders are harassed and put in jail.
• China – the government enforces the harshest program of internet censorship in the world. While users have access to some form of internet, their searches are filtered, sites are blocked, and searches on such issues as Taiwan independence, the Tiananmen Square Massacre, or other controversial issues to sites that offer information that is more flattering to the Communist Party.

Landmark Ruling on Censorship of Magazine Sales

In the mid-1960s, Sam Ginsberg, who owned Sam’s Stationery and Luncheonette on Long Island, was charged with selling “girlie” magazines to a 16-year old boy, which was in violation of New York state law. Ginsberg was tried in the Nassau County District Court, without a jury, and found guilty. The judge found that the magazines contained pictures which, by failing to cover the female buttocks and breasts with an opaque covering, were harmful to minors. He stated that the photos appealed to the “prurient, shameful or morbid interest of minors,” and that the images were patently offensive to standards held by the adult community regarding what was suitable for minors.

Ginsberg was denied the right to appeal his convictions to the New York Court of Appeals, at which time he took his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, on the basis that the state of New York had no authority to define two separate classes of people (minors and adults), with respect to what is harmful. In addition, Ginsberg argued that it was easy to mistake a young person’s age, and the law makes no requirement for how much effort a shop owner must put into determining age before selling magazines intended for adult viewing. The Court did not agree, holding that Ginsberg might be acquitted on the grounds of an “honest mistake,” only if he had made “a reasonable bonafide attempt to ascertain the true age of such a minor.” The conviction was upheld.

Related Legal Terms and Issues

• Appeal – A legal proceeding in which a legal decision is taken to a higher court for review.
• Deprave – Morally bad or debased, corrupt.
• Monarchy – A system of government controlled by one person, usually a king or queen.

Here are two words that are easy to confuse: censor and censure. Let’s try to get them straight.

They are not homophones exactly because they are subtly different in pronunciation. The key is the s in the middle. In censure, it’s pronounced sh like in the word sure. It’s pronounced like a standard s in censor.

Censor

Both words have a noun use and a verb use. A censor (noun) is an official whose job is to examine material for publication and eliminate objectionable matter.

To censor (verb) something is to remove or suppress what is offensive or objectionable.

Censorship is a noun form of the word that refers to the practice of censoring.

In general, censorship carries a negative connotation in the U.S.. Because we value the constitutionally protected concept of free speech, most of Americans object to anything that smells of censorship, especially by the government. Yet, most Americans favor at least some forms of censorship, which is why federal law prohibits the publication of pornography, profanity, and other morally questionable content through easily accessible public media like television and radio.

Click Here to Check Out WriteAtHome or Enroll Now!

Censure

Censure (noun) means “an expression of strong disapproval or harsh criticism.” Similarly, the verb censure means to rebuke or condemn.

Political bodies sometimes resort to censure to formally reprimand misbehaving members. Last year, for example, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to censure Attorney General Eric Holder for refusing to release documents related to the “Fast and Furious” scandal.

Churches and religious bodies might censure an individual as well, an action that might lead to excommunication.

Typically, censure is a formal, public action. An individual criticizing another would not, for example, be considered censure. Nor would a private rebuke. Censuring may or may not carry consequences. Ecclesiastical censure may result in excommunication (though not necessarily), whereas political censure is often used in place of any kind of punitive measures.

Why the Confusion?

Writers and speakers occasionally confuse the two words primarily because of their aural similarity. Both words come from the same Latin word censēre, meaning “to give as one’s opinion, assess.” Both censoring and censuring involve the rendering of a negative opinion — the former leading to removal or suppression and the latter to formal and/or public denouncement.

But one typically only censors publishable material — words and images, while censure is reserved for people. I suppose it’s possible to censure a statement, leading to its being censored, but that would be an atypical use of censure.

*****

As always, I’d love your feedback and comments. Please leave them below.

I doubt it’s a question that academia can answer because ultimately it’s not really a «problem» that can be «solved», it’s a conflict of interest that can only be resolved if the respective parties agree to a resolution.

Like ultimately it’s about whether you respect someone else’s request not to use a word regardless of circumstances or whether you don’t. That’s a decision that you make. And the reasons why that person doesn’t want you to use that word are subjective, so you’d need to negotiate that with that respective person on a case by case basis. Or if it’s a notion expressed by a group with that group.

Sure you can attempt to generalize that the usage of a term is not offensive, but it would be incredibly tone deaf and condescending to tell other people what THEY should and shouldn’t find offensive, like that question is theirs to answer, not yours.

You could formulate edge cases for that, like if language is being censored to the point where you lose expressive power you might side with ignoring the request, if there are alternative words that express the same concept or even express it better without additional baggage you might side with respecting the request or if the word is a literal trigger event for an emotional reaction you might in that situation opt to respect the request. Like if the word «sugar powder» articulated near microphone triggers nuclear Armageddon you might not want to use it despite there’s absolutely nothing wrong with using these 2 words in almost any other context.

And whether it is or isn’t a trigger is again something that can only be answered by those for whom it is a trigger. You can’t assume that, you might not even be able to rationalize it as they might not be able to rationalize that either you could only chose to respect or not respect that request.

To be frank about it, I do not understand the notion of people that claim the word itself is problematic. Like you could imagine a language where the physical articulation of a pattern of speech physically hurts you (like a high pitches screech or whatnot) or where the word itself expresses a concept like idk if the name of your group idk «philosophers» would literally be comprised of the words for «bullshit thinkers» or something like that, so where the insult is literally part of the word.

The n-word is neither. The n-word, on a literal level, just means «black» and it’s not by itself hurtful to say. The insulting hurtful part stems pretty much entirely from it’s context and usage. In that it only makes sense in the context of white supremacy in which being black itself is an insult and used with hatred and contempt and the intent to impress a notion of inferiority to the other person.

What is special about it is most likely it’s ubiquitous and continued usage throughout a large period of time and space. So that it projects it’s own context in the sense that you don’t use it unless you’re a white supremacist and using it is itself a statement of hatred and contempt up to a direct threat to someone’s well being.

Now while in direct communication any word for that matter could be used as a drop-in replacement for the n-word, as it’s not about the word but about the context, seriously calling someone a «hamster» while giving off vibes of intimidation would trigger a similar result. That would be a localized phenomena and other people wouldn’t be in on the meaning so it would lose a lot of it’s power compared to being faced with what might seem to be a giant monolith.

So in other words it needs time, shared memory and continued usage in the public discourse for such a word to enter common knowledge so banning such a word completely sets racists back to square one, just that ideally now they lack the control over the public narrative and the systemic power that they used to have. Meaning it could actually make a difference. Because now people who still use the term stick out like a sore thumb, while if a term is normalized you’d create an image where racists appear much more numerous then they might actually be and where bystanders might assume «just a miscommunication» rather than a deliberate act of hostility when the word is used thereby enforcing that image and enabling abuse.

However that can also make the use/mention distinction difficult because that also sticks out, intended or not. And despite mentioning not being usage in terms of applying it to hurt people, it’s still normalizing the usage of the term. And getting people accustomed to people saying racist shit to harden them against being shocked by that, isn’t necessarily a great idea either as you might also harden yourself against feeling empathy for people on the receiving end as you no longer feel it to be shocking and problematic.

On the other end, if these cases in the article are true it seems pretty ridiculous that people who do not act racist, explicitly position themselves against it and whatnot, should lose their jobs over quotes and mentions. If those were accurate descriptions and not omitted crucial details that seems excessive and counter productive. Especially while simultaneously racism itself and the racist language surrounding these terms is apparently still treated as free speech and not seen as problematic or producing similar levels of outrage as the more catchy use of bad terminology. So that it appears to be treating symptoms rather than root causes.

But apparently this fixation and censorship of words seems to be a cultural thing in the U.S. where there seems to be a whole alphabet of words your not supposed to say and where the words themselves are treated as powerful. So it’s probably only fitting to attempt to add racial slurs on that list as it’s already culturally accepted to not use these words.

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or «inconvenient».^[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,^[5] private institutions and other controlling bodies.

Governments^[5] and private organizations may engage in censorship. Other groups or institutions may propose and petition for censorship.^[6] When an individual such as an author or other creator engages in censorship of their own works or speech, it is referred to as self-censorship. General censorship occurs in a variety of different media, including speech, books, music, films, and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of claimed reasons including national security, to control obscenity, pornography, and hate speech, to protect children or other vulnerable groups, to promote or restrict political or religious views, and to prevent slander and libel.

Direct censorship may or may not be legal, depending on the type, location, and content. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and frequently a claim of necessity to balance conflicting rights is made, in order to determine what could and could not be censored. There are no laws against self-censorship.

History[edit]

In 399 BC, Greek philosopher, Socrates, while defying attempts by the Athenian state to censor his philosophical teachings, was accused of collateral charges related to the corruption of Athenian youth and sentenced to death by drinking a poison, hemlock.

The details of Socrates’s conviction are recorded by Plato as follows. In 399 BC, Socrates went on trial^[8] and was subsequently found guilty of both corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of impiety (asebeia,^[9] «not believing in the gods of the state»),^[10] and as a punishment sentenced to death, caused by the drinking of a mixture containing hemlock.^[11][12][13]

Socrates’ student, Plato, is said to have advocated censorship in his essay on The Republic, which opposed the existence of democracy. In contrast to Plato, Greek playwright Euripides (480–406 BC) defended the true liberty of freeborn men, including the right to speak freely. In 1766, Sweden became the first country to abolish censorship by law.^[14]

Rationale and criticism[edit]

Censorship has been criticized throughout history for being unfair and hindering progress. In a 1997 essay on Internet censorship, social commentator Michael Landier claims that censorship is counterproductive as it prevents the censored topic from being discussed. Landier expands his argument by claiming that those who impose censorship must consider what they censor to be true, as individuals believing themselves to be correct would welcome the opportunity to disprove those with opposing views.^[15]

Censorship is often used to impose moral values on society, as in the censorship of material considered obscene. English novelist E. M. Forster was a staunch opponent of censoring material on the grounds that it was obscene or immoral, raising the issue of moral subjectivity and the constant changing of moral values. When the 1928 novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover was put on trial in 1960, Forster wrote:^[16]

Lady Chatterley’s Lover is a literary work of importance…I do not think that it could be held obscene, but am in a difficulty here, for the reason that I have never been able to follow the legal definition of obscenity. The law tells me that obscenity may deprave and corrupt, but as far as I know, it offers no definition of depravity or corruption.

Proponents have sought to justify it using different rationales for various types of information censored:

• Moral censorship is the removal of materials that are obscene or otherwise considered morally questionable. Pornography, for example, is often censored under this rationale, especially child pornography, which is illegal and censored in most jurisdictions in the world.^[17][18]
• Military censorship is the process of keeping military intelligence and tactics confidential and away from the enemy. This is used to counter espionage.
• Political censorship occurs when governments hold back information from their citizens. This is often done to exert control over the populace and prevent free expression that might foment rebellion.
• Religious censorship is the means by which any material considered objectionable by a certain religion is removed. This often involves a dominant religion forcing limitations on less prevalent ones. Alternatively, one religion may shun the works of another when they believe the content is not appropriate for their religion.
• Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to disrupt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light,^[19][20] or intervene to prevent alternate offers from reaching public exposure.^[21]

Types[edit]

Political[edit]

State secrets and prevention of attention[edit]

In wartime, explicit censorship is carried out with the intent of preventing the release of information that might be useful to an enemy. Typically it involves keeping times or locations secret, or delaying the release of information (e.g., an operational objective) until it is of no possible use to enemy forces. The moral issues here are often seen as somewhat different, as the proponents of this form of censorship argue that the release of tactical information usually presents a greater risk of casualties among one’s own forces and could possibly lead to loss of the overall conflict.

During World War I letters written by British soldiers would have to go through censorship. This consisted of officers going through letters with a black marker and crossing out anything which might compromise operational secrecy before the letter was sent.^[22] The World War II catchphrase «Loose lips sink ships» was used as a common justification to exercise official wartime censorship and encourage individual restraint when sharing potentially sensitive information.^[23]

An example of «sanitization» policies comes from the USSR under Joseph Stalin, where publicly used photographs were often altered to remove people whom Stalin had condemned to execution. Though past photographs may have been remembered or kept, this deliberate and systematic alteration to all of history in the public mind is seen as one of the central themes of Stalinism and totalitarianism.

Censorship is occasionally carried out to aid authorities or to protect an individual, as with some kidnappings when attention and media coverage of the victim can sometimes be seen as unhelpful.^[24]

Religion[edit]

Censorship by religion is a form of censorship where freedom of expression is controlled or limited using religious authority or on the basis of the teachings of the religion.^[25] This form of censorship has a long history and is practiced in many societies and by many religions. Examples include the Galileo affair, Edict of Compiègne, the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (list of prohibited books) and the condemnation of Salman Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses by Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Images of the Islamic figure Muhammad are also regularly censored. In some secular countries, this is sometimes done to prevent hurting religious sentiments.^[26]

Educational sources[edit]

The content of school textbooks is often an issue of debate, since their target audiences are young people. The term whitewashing is commonly used to refer to revisionism aimed at glossing over difficult or questionable historical events, or a biased presentation thereof. The reporting of military atrocities in history is extremely controversial, as in the case of The Holocaust (or Holocaust denial), Bombing of Dresden, the Nanking Massacre as found with Japanese history textbook controversies, the Armenian genocide, the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, and the Winter Soldier Investigation of the Vietnam War.

In the context of secondary school education, the way facts and history are presented greatly influences the interpretation of contemporary thought, opinion and socialization. One argument for censoring the type of information disseminated is based on the inappropriate quality of such material for the younger public. The use of the «inappropriate» distinction is in itself controversial, as it changed heavily. A Ballantine Books version of the book Fahrenheit 451 which is the version used by most school classes^[27] contained approximately 75 separate edits, omissions, and changes from the original Bradbury manuscript.

In February 2006, a National Geographic cover was censored by the Nashravaran Journalistic Institute. The offending cover was about the subject of love and a picture of an embracing couple was hidden beneath a white sticker.^[28]

Economic induced censorship[edit]

Economic induced censorship is a type of censorship enacted by economic markets to favor, and disregard, types of information. Economic induced censorship, is also caused, by market forces which privatize and establish commodification of certain information that is not accessible by the general public, primarily because of the cost associated with commodified information such as academic journals, industry reports and pay to use repositories.^[29]

The concept was illustrated as a censorship pyramid^[30] that was conceptualized by primarily Julian Assange, along with Andy Müller-Maguhn, Jacob Appelbaum and Jérémie Zimmermann, in the Cypherpunks (book).

Self-censorship[edit]

Self-censorship is the act of censoring or classifying one’s own discourse. This is done out of fear of, or deference to, the sensibilities or preferences (actual or perceived) of others and without overt pressure from any specific party or institution of authority. Self-censorship is often practiced by film producers, film directors, publishers, news anchors, journalists, musicians, and other kinds of authors including individuals who use social media.^[32]

According to a Pew Research Center and the Columbia Journalism Review survey, «About one-quarter of the local and national journalists say they have purposely avoided newsworthy stories, while nearly as many acknowledge they have softened the tone of stories to benefit the interests of their news organizations. Fully four-in-ten (41%) admit they have engaged in either or both of these practices.»^[33]

Threats to media freedom have shown a significant increase in Europe in recent years, according to a study published in April 2017 by the Council of Europe.
This results in a fear of physical or psychological violence, and the ultimate result is self-censorship by journalists.^[34]

Copy, picture, and writer approval[edit]

Copy approval is the right to read and amend an article, usually an interview, before publication. Many publications refuse to give copy approval but it is increasingly becoming common practice when dealing with publicity anxious celebrities.^[35] Picture approval is the right given to an individual to choose which photos will be published and which will not. Robert Redford is well known for insisting upon picture approval.^[36] Writer approval is when writers are chosen based on whether they will write flattering articles or not. Hollywood publicist Pat Kingsley is known for banning certain writers who wrote undesirably about one of her clients from interviewing any of her other clients.^{[citation needed]}

Reverse censorship[edit]

Flooding the public, often through online social networks, with false or misleading information is sometimes called «reverse censorship». American legal scholar Tim Wu has explained that this type of information control, sometimes by state actors, can «distort or drown out disfavored speech through the creation and dissemination of fake news, the payment of fake commentators, and the deployment of propaganda robots.»^[37]

By media[edit]

This section needs expansion with: Television and News Media censorship. You can help by adding to it. (May 2020)

Books[edit]

Book censorship can be enacted at the national or sub-national level, and can carry legal penalties for their infraction. Books may also be challenged at a local, community level. As a result, books can be removed from schools or libraries, although these bans do not typically extend outside of that area.

Films[edit]

Aside from the usual justifications of pornography and obscenity, some films are censored due to changing racial attitudes or political correctness in order to avoid ethnic stereotyping and/or ethnic offense despite its historical or artistic value. One example is the still withdrawn «Censored Eleven» series of animated cartoons, which may have been innocent then, but are «incorrect» now.^{[citation needed]}

Film censorship is carried out by various countries. Film censorship is achieved by censoring the producer or restricting a state citizen. For example, in China the film industry censors LGBT-related films. Filmmakers must resort to finding funds from international investors such as the «Ford Foundations» and or produce through an independent film company.^[38]

Music[edit]

Music censorship has been implemented by states, religions, educational systems, families, retailers and lobbying groups – and in most cases they violate international conventions of human rights.^[39]

Maps[edit]

Censorship of maps is often employed for military purposes. For example, the technique was used in former East Germany, especially for the areas near the border to West Germany in order to make attempts of defection more difficult. Censorship of maps is also applied by Google Maps, where certain areas are grayed out or blacked or areas are purposely left outdated with old imagery.^[40]

Art[edit]

Art is loved and feared because of its evocative power. Destroying or oppressing art can potentially justify its meaning even more.^[41]

British photographer and visual artist Graham Ovenden’s photos and paintings were ordered to be destroyed by a London’s magistrate court in 2015 for being «indecent»^[42] and their copies had been removed from the online Tate gallery.^[43]

A 1980 Israeli law forbade banned artwork composed of the four colours of the Palestinian flag,^[44] and Palestinians were arrested for displaying such artwork or even for carrying sliced melons with the same pattern.^[45][46][47]

Moath al-Alwi is a Guantanamo Bay prisoner who creates model ships as an expression of art. Alwi does so with the few tools he has at his disposal such as dental floss and shampoo bottles, and he is also allowed to use a small pair of scissors with rounded edges.^[48] A few of Alwi’s pieces are on display at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. There are also other artworks on display at the College that were created by other inmates. The artwork that is being displayed might be the only way for some of the inmates to communicate with the outside. Recently things have changed though. The military has come up with a new policy that will not allow the artwork at Guantanamo Bay Military Prison to leave the prison. The artwork created by Alwi and other prisoners is now government property and can be destroyed or disposed of in whatever way the government choose, making it no longer the artist’s property.^[49]

Around 300 artists in Cuba are fighting for their artistic freedom due to new censorship rules Cuba’s government has in place for artists. In December 2018, following the introduction of new rules that would ban music performances and artwork not authorized by the state, performance artist Tania Bruguera was detained upon arriving to Havana and released after four days.^[50]

An example of extreme state censorship was the Nazis requirements of using art as propaganda. Art was only allowed to be used as a political instrument to control people and failure to act in accordance with the censors was punishable by law, even fatal. The Degenerate Art Exhibition is a historical instance that’s goal was to advertise Nazi values and slander others.^[51]

Internet[edit]

Internet censorship is control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. It may be carried out by governments or by private organizations either at the behest of the government or on their own initiative. Individuals and organizations may engage in self-censorship on their own or due to intimidation and fear.

The issues associated with Internet censorship are similar to those for offline censorship of more traditional media. One difference is that national borders are more permeable online: residents of a country that bans certain information can find it on websites hosted outside the country. Thus censors must work to prevent access to information even though they lack physical or legal control over the websites themselves. This in turn requires the use of technical censorship methods that are unique to the Internet, such as site blocking and content filtering.^[57]

Furthermore, the Domain Name System (DNS) a critical component of the Internet is dominated by centralized and few entities. The most widely used DNS root is administered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).^[58][59] As an administrator they have rights to shut down and seize domain names when they deem necessary to do so and at most times the direction is from governments. This has been the case with Wikileaks shutdowns^[60] and name seizure events such as the ones executed by the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPR Center) managed by the Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).^[61] This makes it easy for internet censorship by authorities as they have control over what should or should not be on the Internet. Some activists and researchers have started opting for alternative DNS roots, though the Internet Architecture Board^[62] (IAB) does not support these DNS root providers.

Unless the censor has total control over all Internet-connected computers, such as in North Korea or Cuba, total censorship of information is very difficult or impossible to achieve due to the underlying distributed technology of the Internet. Pseudonymity and data havens (such as Freenet) protect free speech using technologies that guarantee material cannot be removed and prevents the identification of authors. Technologically savvy users can often find ways to access blocked content. Nevertheless, blocking remains an effective means of limiting access to sensitive information for most users when censors, such as those in China, are able to devote significant resources to building and maintaining a comprehensive censorship system.^[57]

Views about the feasibility and effectiveness of Internet censorship have evolved in parallel with the development of the Internet and censorship technologies:

• A 1993 Time magazine article quotes computer scientist John Gillmore, one of the founders of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, as saying «The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.»^[63]
• In November 2007, «Father of the Internet» Vint Cerf stated that he sees government control of the Internet failing because the Web is almost entirely privately owned.^[64]
• A report of research conducted in 2007 and published in 2009 by the Beckman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University stated that: «We are confident that the [censorship circumvention] tool developers will for the most part keep ahead of the governments’ blocking efforts», but also that «…we believe that less than two percent of all filtered Internet users use circumvention tools».^[65]
• In contrast, a 2011 report by researchers at the Oxford Internet Institute published by UNESCO concludes «… the control of information on the Internet and Web is certainly feasible, and technological advances do not therefore guarantee greater freedom of speech.»^[57]

A BBC World Service poll of 27,973 adults in 26 countries, including 14,306 Internet users,^[66] was conducted between 30 November 2009 and 7 February 2010. The head of the polling organization felt, overall, that the poll showed that:

Despite worries about privacy and fraud, people around the world see access to the internet as their fundamental right. They think the web is a force for good, and most don’t want governments to regulate it.^[67]

The poll found that nearly four in five (78%) Internet users felt that the Internet had brought them greater freedom, that most Internet users (53%) felt that «the internet should never be regulated by any level of government anywhere», and almost four in five Internet users and non-users around the world felt that access to the Internet was a fundamental right (50% strongly agreed, 29% somewhat agreed, 9% somewhat disagreed, 6% strongly disagreed, and 6% gave no opinion).^[68]

[edit]

The rising use of social media in many nations has led to the emergence of citizens organizing protests through social media, sometimes called «Twitter Revolutions». The most notable of these social media-led protests were the Arab Spring uprisings, starting in 2010. In response to the use of social media in these protests, the Tunisian government began a hack of Tunisian citizens’ Facebook accounts, and reports arose of accounts being deleted.^[69]

Automated systems can be used to censor social media posts, and therefore limit what citizens can say online. This most notably occurs in China, where social media posts are automatically censored depending on content. In 2013, Harvard political science professor Gary King led a study to determine what caused social media posts to be censored and found that posts mentioning the government were not more or less likely to be deleted if they were supportive or critical of the government. Posts mentioning collective action were more likely to be deleted than those that had not mentioned collective action.^[70] Currently, social media censorship appears primarily as a way to restrict Internet users’ ability to organize protests. For the Chinese government, seeing citizens unhappy with local governance is beneficial as state and national leaders can replace unpopular officials. King and his researchers were able to predict when certain officials would be removed based on the number of unfavorable social media posts.^[71]

Research has proved that criticism is tolerable on social media sites, therefore it is not censored unless it has a higher chance of collective action. It is not important whether the criticism is supportive or unsupportive of the states’ leaders, the main priority of censoring certain social media posts is to make sure that no big actions are being made due to something that was said on the internet. Posts that challenge the Party’s political leading role in the Chinese government are more likely to be censored due to the challenges it poses to the Chinese Communist Party.^[72]

In December 2022 Elon Musk, owner and CEO of Twitter released internal documents from the social media microblogging site to journalists Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger and Bari Weiss. The analysis of these files on Twitter, collectively called, the Twitter Files, explored the content moderation and visibility filtering carried out in collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the Hunter Biden laptop controversy.

On the platform TikTok, certain hashtags have been categorized by the platform’s code and determines how viewers can or cannot interact with the content or hashtag specifically. Some shadowbanned tags include: #acab, #GayArab, #gej due to their referencing of certain social movements and LGBTQ identity. As TikTok guidelines are becoming more localized around the world, some experts believe that this could result in more censorship than before.^[73]

Video games[edit]

Since the early 1980s, advocates of video games have emphasized their use as an expressive medium, arguing for their protection under the laws governing freedom of speech and also as an educational tool. Detractors argue that video games are harmful and therefore should be subject to legislative oversight and restrictions. Many video games have certain elements removed or edited due to regional rating standards.^[74][75]
For example, in the Japanese and PAL Versions of No More Heroes, blood splatter and gore is removed from the gameplay. Decapitation scenes are implied, but not shown. Scenes of missing body parts after having been cut off, are replaced with the same scene, but showing the body parts fully intact.^[76]

Impact of surveillance[edit]

Surveillance and censorship are different. Surveillance can be performed without censorship, but it is harder to engage in censorship without some form of surveillance.^[77] Even when surveillance does not lead directly to censorship, the widespread knowledge or belief that a person, their computer, or their use of the Internet is under surveillance can have a «chilling effect» and lead to self-censorship.^[78]

Implementation[edit]

The former Soviet Union maintained a particularly extensive program of state-imposed censorship. The main organ for official censorship in the Soviet Union was the Chief Agency for Protection of Military and State Secrets generally known as the Glavlit, its Russian acronym. The Glavlit handled censorship matters arising from domestic writings of just about any kind – even beer and vodka labels. Glavlit censorship personnel were present in every large Soviet publishing house or newspaper; the agency employed some 70,000 censors to review information before it was disseminated by publishing houses, editorial offices, and broadcasting studios. No mass medium escaped Glavlit‘s control. All press agencies and radio and television stations had Glavlit representatives on their editorial staffs.^[79]

Sometimes, public knowledge of the existence of a specific document is subtly suppressed, a situation resembling censorship. The authorities taking such action will justify it by declaring the work to be «subversive» or «inconvenient». An example is Michel Foucault’s 1978 text Sexual Morality and the Law (later republished as The Danger of Child Sexuality), originally published as La loi de la pudeur [literally, «the law of decency»]. This work defends the decriminalization of statutory rape and the abolition of age of consent laws.^{[citation needed]}

When a publisher comes under pressure to suppress a book, but has already entered into a contract with the author, they will sometimes effectively censor the book by deliberately ordering a small print run and making minimal, if any, attempts to publicize it. This practice became known in the early 2000s as privishing (private publishing).^[80] an OpenNet Initiative (ONI) classifications:^[81]

By country[edit]

Censorship for individual countries is measured by Freedom House (FH) Freedom of the Press report,^[82] Reporters Without Borders (RWB) Press freedom index^[83] and V-Dem government censorship effort index. Censorship aspects are measured by Freedom on the Net^[52] and OpenNet Initiative (ONI) classifications.^[81] Censorship by country collects information on censorship, internet censorship, press freedom, freedom of speech, and human rights by country and presents it in a sortable table, together with links to articles with more information. In addition to countries, the table includes information on former countries, disputed countries, political sub-units within countries, and regional organizations.

Canada[edit]

Very little is formally censored in Canada, aside from «obscenity» (as defined in the landmark criminal case of R v Butler) which is generally limited to pornography and child pornography depicting and/or advocating non-consensual sex, sexual violence, degradation, or dehumanization, in particular that which causes harm (as in R v Labaye). Most films are simply subject to classification by the British Columbia Film Classification Office under the non-profit Crown corporation by the name of Consumer Protection BC, whose classifications are officially used by the provinces of British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Manitoba.^[84]

Cuba[edit]

Cuban media used to be operated under the supervision of the Communist Party’s Department of Revolutionary Orientation, which «develops and coordinates propaganda strategies».^[85] Connection to the Internet is restricted and censored.^[86]

China[edit]

The People’s Republic of China employs sophisticated censorship mechanisms, referred to as the Golden Shield Project, to monitor the internet. Popular search engines such as Baidu also remove politically sensitive search results.^[87][88][89]

Eastern Bloc[edit]

Strict censorship existed in the Eastern Bloc.^[90] Throughout the bloc, the various ministries of culture held a tight rein on their writers.^[91] Cultural products there reflected the propaganda needs of the state.^[91] Party-approved censors exercised strict control in the early years.^[92] In the Stalinist period, even the weather forecasts were changed if they suggested that the sun might not shine on May Day.^[92] Under Nicolae Ceauşescu in Romania, weather reports were doctored so that the temperatures were not seen to rise above or fall below the levels which dictated that work must stop.^[92]

Possession and use of copying machines was tightly controlled in order to hinder the production and distribution of samizdat, illegal self-published books and magazines. Possession of even a single samizdat manuscript such as a book by Andrei Sinyavsky was a serious crime which might involve a visit from the KGB. Another outlet for works which did not find favor with the authorities was publishing abroad.

France[edit]

Amid declining car sales in 2020, France banned a television ad by a Dutch bike company, saying the ad «unfairly discredited the automobile industry».^[93]

India[edit]

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of expression, but places certain restrictions on content, with a view towards maintaining communal and religious harmony, given the history of communal tension in the nation.^[94] According to the Information Technology Rules 2011, objectionable content includes anything that «threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states or public order».^[95] Notably many pornographic websites are blocked in India.

Iran[edit]

Iraq[edit]

Iraq under Baathist Saddam Hussein had much the same techniques of press censorship as did Romania under Nicolae Ceauşescu but with greater potential violence.^[96]

Japan[edit]

During the GHQ occupation of Japan after WW2, any criticism of the Allies’ pre-war policies, the SCAP, the Far East Military Tribunal, the inquiries against the United States and every direct and indirect references to the role played by the Allied High Command in drafting Japan’s new constitution or to censorship of publications, movies, newspapers and magazines was subject to massive censorship, purges, media blackout.^[97]

In the four years (September 1945–November 1949) since the CCD was active, 200 million pieces of mail and 136 million telegrams were opened, and telephones were tapped 800,000 times. Since no criticism of the occupying forces for crimes such as the dropping of the atomic bomb, rape and robbery by US soldiers was allowed, a strict check was carried out. Those who got caught were put on a blacklist called the watchlist, and the persons and the organizations to which they belonged were investigated in detail, which made it easier to dismiss or arrest the «disturbing molecule».^[98]

Malaysia[edit]

Under subsection 48(3) and (4) of the Penang Islamic Religious Administration Enactment 2004, non-Muslims in Malaysia are penalized for using the following words, or to write or publish them, in any form, version or translation in any language or for use in any publicity material in any medium:
«Allah», «Firman Allah», «Ulama», «Hadith», «Ibadah», «Kaabah», «Qadhi'», «Illahi», «Wahyu», «Mubaligh», «Syariah», «Qiblat», «Haji», «Mufti», «Rasul», «Iman», «Dakwah», «Wali», «Fatwa», «Imam», «Nabi», «Sheikh», «Khutbah», «Tabligh», «Akhirat», «Azan», «Al Quran», «As Sunnah», «Auliya'», «Karamah», «False Moon God», «Syahadah», «Baitullah», «Musolla», «Zakat Fitrah», «Hajjah», «Taqwa» and «Soleh».^{[99][100][101]}

North Korea[edit]

Serbia[edit]

According to Christian Mihr, executive director of Reporters Without Borders, «censorship in Serbia is neither direct nor transparent, but is easy to prove.»^[102] According to Mihr there are numerous examples of censorship and self-censorship in Serbia ^[103] According to Mihr, Serbian prime minister Aleksandar Vučić has proved «very sensitive to criticism, even on critical questions,» as was the case with Natalija Miletic, a correspondent for Deutsche Welle Radio, who questioned him in Berlin about the media situation in Serbia and about allegations that some ministers in the Serbian government had plagiarized their diplomas, and who later received threats and offensive articles on the Serbian press.^[103]

Multiple news outlets have accused Vučić of anti-democratic strongman tendencies.^{[104][105][106][107][108]} In July 2014, journalists associations were concerned about the freedom of the media in Serbia, in which Vučić came under criticism.^[109][110]

In September 2015 five members of United States Congress (Edie Bernice Johnson, Carlos Curbelo, Scott Perry, Adam Kinzinger, and Zoe Lofgren) have informed Vice President of the United States Joseph Biden that Aleksandar’s brother, Andrej Vučić, is leading a group responsible for deteriorating media freedom in Serbia.^[111]

Singapore[edit]

In the Republic of Singapore, Section 33 of the Films Act originally banned the making, distribution and exhibition of «party political films», at the pain of a fine not exceeding $100,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.^[112] The Act further defines a «party political film» as any film or video

(a) which is an advertisement made by or on behalf of any political party in Singapore or any body whose objects relate wholly or mainly to politics in Singapore, or any branch of such party or body; or

(b) which is made by any person and directed towards any political end in Singapore

In 2001, the short documentary called A Vision of Persistence on opposition politician J. B. Jeyaretnam was also banned for being a «party political film». The makers of the documentary, all lecturers at the Ngee Ann Polytechnic, later submitted written apologies and withdrew the documentary from being screened at the 2001 Singapore International Film Festival in April, having been told they could be charged in court.^[113] Another short documentary called Singapore Rebel by Martyn See, which documented Singapore Democratic Party leader Dr Chee Soon Juan’s acts of civil disobedience, was banned from the 2005 Singapore International Film Festival on the same grounds and See is being investigated for possible violations of the Films Act.^[114]

This law, however, is often disregarded when such political films are made supporting the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP). Channel NewsAsia’s five-part documentary series on Singapore’s PAP ministers in 2005, for example, was not considered a party political film.^[115]

Exceptions are also made when political films are made concerning political parties of other nations. Films such as Michael Moore’s 2004 documentary Fahrenheit 911 are thus allowed to screen regardless of the law.^[116]

Since March 2009, the Films Act has been amended to allow party political films as long as they were deemed factual and objective by a consultative committee. Some months later, this committee lifted the ban on Singapore Rebel.^[117]

Soviet Union[edit]

Independent journalism did not exist in the Soviet Union until Mikhail Gorbachev became its leader; all reporting was directed by the Communist Party or related organizations. Pravda, the predominant newspaper in the Soviet Union, had a monopoly. Foreign newspapers were available only if they were published by communist parties sympathetic to the Soviet Union.

Spain[edit]

Turkey[edit]

Online access to all language versions of Wikipedia was blocked in Turkey on 29 April 2017 by Erdoğan’s government.^[118]

United Kingdom[edit]

United States[edit]

In the United States, censorship occurs through books, film festivals, politics, and public schools.^[119] See banned books for more information. Additionally, critics of campaign finance reform in the United States say this reform imposes widespread restrictions on political speech.^[120][121]

Uruguay[edit]

In 1973, a military coup took power in Uruguay, and the State practiced censorship. For example, writer Eduardo Galeano was imprisoned and later was forced to flee. His book Open Veins of Latin America was banned by the right-wing military government, not only in Uruguay, but also in Chile and Argentina.^[122]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

Works cited[edit]

• Crampton, R.J. (1997), Eastern Europe in the Twentieth Century and After, Routledge, ISBN 978-0415164221
• Major, Patrick; Mitter, Rana (2004), «East is East and West is West?», in Major, Patrick (ed.), Across the Blocs: Exploring Comparative Cold War Cultural and Social History, Taylor & Francis, Inc., ISBN 978-0714684642

Further reading[edit]

• Abbott, Randy. «A Critical Analysis of the Library-Related Literature Concerning Censorship in Public Libraries and Public School Libraries in the United States During the 1980s.» Project for degree of Education Specialist, University of South Florida, December 1987.
• Biltereyst, Daniel, ed. Silencing Cinema. Palgrave/Macmillan, 2013.* Birmingham, Kevin, The Most Dangerous Book: The Battle for James Joyce’s Ulysses, London (Head of Zeus Ltd), 2014, ISBN 978-1594203367
• Burress, Lee. Battle of the Books. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1989.
• Butler, Judith, «Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative»(1997).
• Darnton, Robert, Censors at Work: How States Shaped Literature. New York: W. W. Norton. 2014. ISBN 978-0393242294.
• Demm, Eberhard. Censorship and Propaganda in World War I: A Comprehensive History (Bloomsbury Academic, 2019) online review
• Foucault, Michel, edited by Lawrence D. Kritzman. Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and Other Writings 1977–1984 (New York/London: 1988, Routledge, ISBN 0415900824) (The text Sexual Morality and the Law is Chapter 16 of the book).
• Gilbert, Nora. Better Left Unsaid: Victorian Novels, Hays Code Films, and the Benefits of Censorship. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2013.
• Hoffman, Frank. Intellectual Freedom and Censorship. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1989.
• Mathiesen, Kay Censorship and Access to Information Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics, Kenneth E. Himma, Herman T. Tavani, eds., John Wiley and Sons, New York, 2008
• National Coalition against Censorship (NCAC). «Books on Trial: A Survey of Recent Cases.» January 1985.
• Parker, Alison M. (1997). Purifying America: Women, Cultural Reform, and Pro-Censorship Activism, 1873–1933, University of Illinois Press.
• Ringmar, Erik A Blogger’s Manifesto: Free Speech and Censorship in the Age of the Internet (London: Anthem Press, 2007)
• Terry, John David II. «Censorship: Post Pico.» In School Law Update, 1986, edited by Thomas N. Jones and Darel P. Semler.
• Sandefur, Timothy (2008). «Censorship». In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Cato Institute. pp. 56–57. ISBN 978-1412965804.
• Silber, Radomír. Partisan Media and Modern Censorship: Media Influence On Czech Political Partisanship and the Media’s Creation of Limits to Public Opposition and Control of Exercising Power in the Czech Republic in the 1990s. First edition. Brno: Tribun EU, 2017. 86 stran. Librix.eu. ISBN 978-8026311744.
• Silber, Radomír. (2018) On Modern Censorship in Public Service Broadcasting. Cultural and Religious Studies, Volume 3, 2018, ISSN 2328-2177.
• Wittern-Keller, Laura. Freedom of the Screen: Legal Challenges to State Film Censorship, 1915–1981. University Press of Kentucky 2008

Below are listed words related to censorship, with definitions/explanations and sample sentences showing the words used in context. (Some words may have additional meanings unrelated to censorship.)

anonymous (adjective): unidentified by name; of unknown name – The college received an anonymous donation.

authoritarian (adjective): expecting strict obedience to (state) authority at the cost of personal freedom; with little or no concern for the wishes or desires of other people – Under the new party the government is becoming increasingly authoritarian.

ban (verb): officially prevent someone from doing something – Many users have been banned from Facebook for posts that Facebook doesn’t like. | Russian dissident Alexey Navalny claimed that the banning of Donald Trump on Twitter was an «unacceptable act of censorship».

biased (adjective): unfairly prejudiced for or against someone or something – This channel’s news reporting is biased because it is part-owned by the opposition party.

Big Tech (noun): a nickname for the largest and most dominant companies in the information technology industry of the USA, mainly Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, and Microsoft – Some people claim that Big Tech has become Big Brother.

blacklist (noun, also verb): a list of people or groups that are banned from something – You may be backlisted from Facebook if you post unorthodox material.

blue-pencil (verb): to censor or make cuts in text – In both world wars, letters sent home from the front were systematically blue-pencilled by military censors to avoid giving away locations and other secrets.

blur out (verb): to make an area of a photo fuzzy and unclear – Luckily they blurred out our faces before publication so no-one knew it was us.

book burning (noun): the deliberate destruction by fire of books (and other paper-based publications) – Under Hitler, the Nazis famously held book burning campaigns in the 1930s, destroying large quantities of publications that they considered subversive or opposed to Nazism.

brainwash (verb): to indoctrinate; to make someone change their beliefs by using systematic and often forcible pressure – The government tried to brainwash people into thinking that war was essential.

cancel culture (noun): a way of behaving where you completely reject and stop supporting someone because they have said or done something that offends you; a modern form of ostracism, especially on social media; exclusion of someone from a society or group – In a cancel culture we appoint ourselves the arbiters of right and wrong and also the judge and jury. | Many people are finding themselves cancelled because of something they have posted on the internet many years ago.

chilling effect (noun): a discouraging effect; the concept that people may limit what they say publicly because they fear specific government laws or social repercussions – There are fears the new state-backed legislation will have a chilling effect on journalism in general.

classified (adjective): officially categorized as secret or top secret and open only to authorized people – I noticed a file he had carelessly left on his desk that was marked «Classified: TOP SECRET».

controversial (adjective): likely to cause public argument – Religion and politics are usually considered controversial topics for discussion.

deny (verb): refuse to give to someone – Visitors were denied access to the site because it had been hacked.

deplatform (verb): prevent a person from contributing to a discussion or forum, especially on social media – For telling the truth as she saw it she was deplatformed from Facebook, Twitter, the App Store and Play Store.

dictatorship (noun): government with a single ruler who has absolute power (dictator), usually obtained by force – There are still a few dictatorships left in the world.

dictator (noun): a ruler who has absolute power over a country – If you asked people to name the most famous dictator in history, most would probably say Adolf Hitler.

disinformation (noun): misinformation that is deliberately misleading and intended to deceive – Nuclear matters are often shrouded in a cloud of secrecy and disinformation.

domain name (noun): in simple terms, a domain name is a website name, such as facebook.com or twitter.com. Domain names are recorded in a central registry. – How many domain names have you registered?

extremist content (noun): (usually political or religious) ideas considered far from the mainstream way of thinking – Because of the extremist content on his website, it was feared he might become violent.

filter (verb): to process and remove unwanted content – ISPs began filtering websites for offensive material.

fact-check (verb): to check that all the facts in a newspaper article, TV programme etc are accurate – Did anybody bother to fact-check CNN’s covid program last night? It was peppered with inaccuracies.

fact-checker (verb): a person employed to factcheck – I wonder how you get a job as a fact-checker?

fake news (uncountable noun): false or misleading information presented as news, usually aiming to damage somebody’s reputation or make money. It is found in newspapers, magazines, TV, the spoken word, and increasingly the internet especially on social media such as Facebook (itself sometimes scathingly referred to as Fakebook). The British government avoids the term on the grounds that is is «poorly-defined» and «conflates a variety of false information, from genuine error through to foreign interference». – She claims that fake news, long a feature of social media, is growing in mainstream media.

First Amendment (noun): an amendment (modification) to the US Constitution that guarantees several freedoms especially with respect to expression and religion – The poet argued in court that her work was protected by the First Amendment.

free speech (noun): the right to express any opinions without censorship or punishment – In fact free speech is never 100% free since all countries have specific laws that limit such things as incitement to violence or slander.

freedom of the press (noun): the right of the press/media to publish legal information and opinions without government interference – In many countries, freedom of the press was achieved only after periods of rebellion.

freedom of expression (noun): the right to express any opinions without censorship or punishment – According to the Global Expression Report by Article19, freedom of expression around the world has been declining and in 2020 was at its lowest score for a decade.

hate speech (noun): threatening and abusive speech or writing that expresses extreme prejudice on the basis of race, gender, religion and so on – Many countries have laws that ban hate speech in any form.

heresy (noun): opinion contrary to orthodox (normally Christian) religion, and by extension any prevailing view – The bishop was burned at the stake for heresy. | In 1633 the astronomer Galileo was charged with heresy for claiming that the sun did not revolve around the earth. His writings were banned and he was imprisoned for life.

heretic (noun): a person practising religious heresy; a person who has opinions that are not generally accepted – He became the ultimate heretic by not accepting their political viewpoint.

the Inquisition (proper noun, capital I): a powerful 13th-century court set up by the Catholic Church in Europe to root out and punish heresy — notorious for the use of torture to extract confessions. – The Mexican president condemned Facebook and Twitter as «a court of censorship like the Inquisition to manage public opinion.»

inquisition (noun): prolonged and intensive questioning – He had to face a two-hour inquisition from his wife about the woman in the restaurant.

IP address (noun): an “Internet Protocol” address is a special set of numbers that identifies a device (computer, phone, server etc) on the internet – The authorities can often trace the location of a computer through its IP address.

ISP (internet service provider) (noun): a communications company that supplies internet access to individuals or businesses – The local ISPs charge $30 a month for unlimited internet access.

leak, news leak (noun): an intentional disclosure of something secret or private – An employee with a grudge was responsible for the leak to several newspapers.

liable (adjective): responsible in law; legally responsible – People may be liable if they cause injury to another person.

manipulation (noun): controlling or influencing (a person or situation), usually get what one wants – There was obvious manipulation of the crowds by the media.

misinformation (noun): false, untrue, inaccurate and misleading information – The newspaper editor acknowledged her mistake and apologised for spreading misinformation.

news blackout (noun): a period of time during which news about a particular event is not allowed to be reported – During the crisis the government imposed a news blackout on all media.

orthodox (adjective): conforming to the generally-accepted views of the time – He promoted the benefits of both orthodox medicine and alternative medicine.

perspective (noun): point of view; a particular way of looking at some issue – It is important to listen to the perspectives of others before making decisions.

police (verb): maintain law and order; enforce regulations, enforce an agreement; monitor and enforce the provisions of a law, agreement etc – Many governments have woken up to the need to police social media.

political correctness (noun): the practice of avoiding language that might be offensive to certain groups of people, especially in relation to gender and race – For reasons of political correctness they were forced to withdraw their advertisement from television.

political movement (noun): a group of people working together to promote their shared political ideas – The Middle East saw the growth of numerous political movements during the so-called Arab Spring of 2010-2012.

political uprising (noun): an act of rebellion against a government or other political authority or organization – Many governments censor the internet to disrupt coordination of political uprisings.

pornography (noun): explicit display or description of sexual activity or sexual organs, intended to arouse sexual desire – Some countries have strict laws banning pornography.

politicized (adjective): made political in character – The issue has been increasingly politicized and has divided the country.

propaganda (noun): information, especially biased or misleading information, used to promote a political cause or other point of view – The government promoted constant propaganda in the news to maintain power.

precedent (noun): an earlier event that is seen as an example or guide in managing a similar subsequent event – The precedents of the 1994 case helped the judge arrive at a verdict.

riot, riots (noun): a public and violent disturbance of the peace by a crowd – Following the announcement, riots broke out in the streets.

riot (verb): to take part in a violent disturbance of the peace – When people are unhappy about some government actions, they may riot in protest.

Section 230 (proper noun): a controversial part of the American Communications Decency Act (1996) that essentially provides immunity for websites from content posted by users – Without Section 230, social media sites like Facebook could not have grown into the giants they are today.

shadow ban (verb): to block a user on a website or chatroom without their knowledge, so that they continue to see their own posts and comments but nobody else does – He was angry when he realised he’d been shadow banned for the last four weeks and had been wasting his time making hundreds of posts that no-one could see.

social unrest (noun): a state of dissatisfaction and disturbance among ordinary people, often involving public demonstrations or disorder – Some governments try to control the internet in their country as they fear social unrest.

subjectivity (noun): the quality of being based on or influenced by personal opinions or feelings – The subjectivity of each researcher creates a degree of bias.

suppression (noun): the prevention or stopping (of something) – The government relies on censorship for its suppression of political dissent.

The Thought Police (noun): in George Orwell’s dystopian novel «Nineteen Eighty-Four», the secret police of the superstate who discover and punish wrongthink. – It’s not 1984 anymore but The Thought Police are everywhere.

throttle (verb): to limit a social media user’s reach so that whatever they post goes to fewer people than before – Most people don’t realise that their posts are being throttled by Facebook and they just keep posting regardless.

top secret (adjective): highly classified; of the highest secrecy – The experiments were top secret so the media didn’t even know of their existence.

totalitarian (adjective): relating to a centralised system of government that demands total subservience to the state – The citizens were happy to see the end of the old totalitarian regime.

Wikileaks (proper noun): international non-profit website founded by Julian Assange that publishes news leaks and classified media provided by anonymous sources – Wikileaks is probably most famous for publishing a video showing the crew of a US military helicopter deliberately killing civilians in Baghdad, Iraq.

whistle-blower (noun): a person who informs on an organization (or another person) considered to be acting against the law or immorally – For leaking highly classified US Government information, Edward Snowden has been variously called a traitor, a hero, a whistleblower, a dissident and a patriot.

wrongthink (noun): opinions and beliefs that do not follow orthodox or mainstream thinking – The term «wrongthink» is probably modelled on «crimethink» from George Orwell’s dystopian novel «Nineteen Eighty-Four» published in 1949.