The case for/against the regulation of mass media is one that I can never seem to take a stand on. Most of the time, I lean more towards the against side- simply from an unconstitutional standpoint and because I'm really not sure censorship is as effective as many believe it is. I don't necessarily agree with the suggestion that the media is destroying the morals and characters of our nation. Therefore, I don't entirely agree with censorship as being completely effective in avoiding total corruption by media, as many argue for the case of censorship.
I'm particularly against the idea of 'positive' media regulation, which makes me wonder if I am then entirely anti-censorship. In positive media regulation, its encouraged that production companies produce desirable types of content. To me, this is glorifying the media, of which I am entirely against.
A really highly controversial censorship example that has resonated with me over time has to do with the tragedies of 9/11. When 9/11 occurred, a lot of papers ran images of "The Falling Man". Some ran large photos on their front pages, others ran smaller images inside their papers and some chose not to run the photo at all. A lot of people were really astounded when newspapers chose to run this image. People began to define 9/11 with this image alone.
"In most American newspapers, the photograph that Richard Drew took of the Falling Man ran once and never again. Papers all over the country, from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram to the Memphis Commercial Appeal to The Denver Post, were forced to defend themselves against charges that they exploited a man's death, stripped him of his dignity, invaded his privacy, turned tragedy into leering pornography. Most letters of complaint stated the obvious: that someone seeing the picture had to know who it was."
Although the image is horribly sad, I don't think censorship would have been appropriate here. I think the world has a right to be witness to what the media has to offer. Does this, therefore, make me anti-censorship? I still don't really know.
I do have my days where I want to argue for the case of the regulation of mass media because media, after all, is a large source of education for a lot of the country. With the amount of sex and violence available in all forms of mass media, I am concerned with the early education of a lot of the youth of our nation.
Nonetheless, there is something incredibly valuable in raw content that I'm not sure I'd ever be willing to argue against.
No comments:
Post a Comment