1. Feather in his article in the kit writes, “Finally,
the state can prevent the dissemination of information.
This can be for reasons of security, morality or political
expediency, and can be overt or covert; it is, necessarily,
the most difficult area to explore.”
Discuss how various technologies can aid in censorship
and how others are less effective.
THESE ARE SAMPLE ROUGH NOTES THAT I WOULD MAKE ON THE LEFT
HAND SIDE OF THE BOOKLET—I WOULD BRAINSTORM BEFORE
I WROTE THE ESSAY ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE BOOKLETS.
I WOULD THEN ORGANIZE MY THOUGHTS INTO SENTENCES AND PARAGRAPHS.
SPELLING MISTAKES WILL BE OVERLOOKED AS LONG AS THE MEANING
IS CLEAR.
Start with political censorship:
- how explain state censorship? seeks to prevent
information from reaching public
- banning books on religious or political grounds
- closing down newspapers, or govt.s supporting only some
newspapers that support their views
not just anyone can start up alternate communication routes:
‡ expensive to run a printing press so can’t just
start one
t.v. very expensive medium to operate—need a lot of
money + regulated by state
- yet some technologies can spread anti-govt. news:
- fax machine, photocoping, duplicating machines-- --other
govt. supported radio stations (e.g., of collapse of communism
in Europe because of barrage of information from the West)
BUT still some state/big business control of content of
information:
- but even though other technologies –especially Web
allows for open access to information,
t.v. and radio can still be seen as potentially state-controlled/big
business controlled…because of high costs of industry.
(information is that which they want us to hear/see to promote
consumerism)
- newspapers constrained by “libel” laws so that
they can’t publish anything defamatory about someone.
Conclusion about political censorship??
What about moral censorship?
- laws define the limits of what you can say that is sexually
explicit
- in Canada have tension between right of free speech (as
guaranteed by Charter of Rights) and Criminal Code. –
includes obscenity, child pornography, hate propaganda,
defamatory libel)
obscenity defined by “community standards” –
anyway, can possess but not distribute that which is truly
obscene—much of what is on Internet is not illegal—except
for CHILD pornography)
court cases made it clear that you can’t possess or
distribute child pornography. (except for 2 exceptions—written
work solely for own use OR work made by under-18’s
for their own use)
problems charging anyone for child pornography—hard
but not impossible: there are court cases so law must be
still effective…
Feather talks about developing ISP “code of conduct”…sanction—denial
of access for offenders…would this work??
conclusion??
