Censorship is a way of control. Censorship is used to control the social interaction of the public with the media. Such a censorship can be directed to various medias if the media is judged to be either immoral, blasphemous, obscene, unpatriotic, radical or seditious. In the novel, Fahrenheit 451, the government prohibited and burned books; the public is denied access to and the use of books the government deemed as objectionable or promoted individuality. The public is only authorized to access, keep and read rule books, trade journals and the three-dimensional comic books, any other books were subjected to burning.
For better or worse, we are inextricably linked to the media. We are now living a media culture and its influence is becoming very pervasive (Mohd Hamdan Adnan 2003) There is one law in Malaysia that protects media freedom, Article 10 of the Constitution. It also notes that there are limits to this freedom, and these limits are, generally, defined by the Government. Media freedom is defined the freedom of communicating and expressing through media including various electronic media and published materials. Freedom of the press is essential to democracy, but like other freedoms, it may also complicate the governing process.
Besides an individual enjoying the protections of free speech, commercial speech is also protected (Hall, 2014). The billboard is artistic, visual, and written, which are all protected forms of speech (Hall, 2014). Although it is more regulated, especially commercial speech as it applies to politics, the advertisement would be protected so long as it is not obscene, threatening, or compromise a valid interest of the government (Hall,
How did the judiciary of the Netherlands solve the conflict between freedom of expression and discriminatory hate speech in the second wilders case? Introduction The right to freedom of speech is a fundamental human right protected by treaties of several global and European institutions. In a democracy it might be necessary to avoid certain forms of speech that offend or promote hatred against others based on intolerance. The right to freedom of expression is considered essential for politicians and specifically for opposition politicians. The two Wilders cases display the conflict that can arise between freedom of speech and between the protection of a group of people from discriminatory hate speech.
The document consisted of acts/ laws that, if violated by citizens; they would have suffered consequences. For example, the document proclaimed that if, “any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States” (Sedition Act), would have been convicted, punished, and imprisoned. Our fellow opponents, the Republicans, stated that with this law, we eliminated freedom of speech and press that was granted by the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. That was quite incorrect. This was a necessary precaution for the prosperity and stability of our nation.
The period inscribed incessant terror into the minds of innocent citizens. The entire country was destitute of trust and loyalty, Robespierre included. Robespierre, fixated with the newfound mindset to “smother the internal and external enemies of the Republic” ( Document G), ordered counter-revolutionists to be executed; a vile method to weed out the enemies. This method not only gave the order to exile with no substantial evidence of a crime, (Document E) went against the purpose of the Committee of Public Safety (Document E). This not only muffled the voices of the people and robbed the freedom they graciously fought the monarchy for, but also encrypted fear and distrust in the French government.
As Malaysian citizens, besides having the right to say and express whatever we want, we also have the right to assemble peaceably and we also have the right to form associations however it also being stated in Article 10 (2) (a) (b) (c) that the parliament has the right to impose restrictions on these rights. It is true that Malaysians get to enjoy the freedom of speech and expression as stated in the Federal Constitution but this freedom is restricted and these restrictions are the exception, permitted only to protect: the rights or reputations of others, national security, public order, public health and morals. This simply means that as Malaysian citizens, we do have the right to say and express whatever we want as long as it does not break the rules or regulations
A constitution is a set of fundamental and entrenched rules governing the conduct of an organisation or nation, establishing its concept, character, and structure. It is usually a short document general nature and embodying the aspirations of values of its writers and subjects. (Business Dictionary, 2015). A constitution is the ultimate authority; any action, which contravenes the rules of the constitution, will be both unconstitutional and unlawful. It will also help identify the rights and freedoms of citizens through a bill of rights, which operates both to protect citizens and to restrict the power of the state.
Malaysian has the right to freedom of speech which is guaranteed by Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia. The Article 10 allows all citizens the absolute freedom as not restricted by the government. In Malaysia, Law such as Publications act and printing presses give the Malaysian authorities the control over all the media. Any act that against this law may lead to fines or in much extreme cases, prison sentence. Although Malaysia has the right to freedom of speech, the media are still being controlled by the government which restrict them to publish anything against the government.
Galloway explains that free speech is the underlying foundation of a democratic government and allows discussions on important issues and provides access to information which develops an informed society and encourages the prevailing of truth. While it is ensured by the Constitution, freedom of speech is not an absolute right as the Parliament is allowed to enact laws to restrict it, especially when it involves hate speech. There is no universally agreed definition for hate speech but the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers Recommendation 97(20) stated that hate speech covers ‘all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other