What censorship?

Censorship is not always a bad thing. Most people are exposed to censorship for the first time when they watch TV as a child. Curse words are bleeped out, and nudity is blurred. This content is censored because it is generally considered to be inappropriate for young viewers. The key here is the general agreement on appropriateness in this circumstance. Since the majority agree, those who oppose this censorship generally understand that they are a minority and that the issue isn't that important. They might result in being slightly annoyed that they can’t hear all the cursing without the annoying bleeps, but they leave it at that.

                The previous example represents censorship that isn't a big issue to most people, and is clearly apparent. When censorship is a big issue, people tend not to sit idly by and accept that their content has been altered based on some group’s bias for what they are consuming. When Fox News and another news group report the same story, each leaving out specific details to portray an apparent view, the public voices their concern. News agencies get called out frequently for having biases like these, and they are confirmed by the availability of other news reporting the same stories. The other possible combination of censorship not being a big issue, but also not very apparent isn't very important, so I won’t go into much detail here.

                What I will describe next, Internet censorship, is one of the most terrifying uses of censorship possible. To understand internet censorship, you must first understand the internet itself. The internet is a series of links, each transmitting a packet of data from a content provider to a consumer (in the cases I’d like to consider here). At the end of each link lives a piece of networking hardware, owned by a local internet company, or a larger internet service provider. Any person in control of the hardware at that link can monitor everything going in and out of it, and even alter the information passing through it.

                Now imagine a scenario where a government, or any other group with control over any of the links on your path, decides they would like to enforce their own agenda on information being passed through. This brings forward a type of censorship that is known to exist, but those who are looking at censored content are likely unaware. In the case where your country is playing propaganda over loudspeakers, it may not be too difficult to realize there might be a bias in the information you are receiving. On the other hand, consider an internet user who believes that they are looking at all of the possible sources of information about current events, when outsiders know that those in their country are unaware of the fact that they are blocked from all but sources that conform to their government’s agenda. This can be used at the whim of the government in any circumstance. For example, Pakistan’s Supreme Court enforced that those controlling internet links in the country must block cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad, because they didn’t want their people’s opinions to be altered by them. Even more extreme are the uses if internet censorship in China. Those who researched such censorship concluded that the Chinese government ‘has been obsessed with ensuring that its people have access to “correct” information that supports the state’s propaganda.’ (Chung, 731)

                This all begs the question: Is what you read on the internet exposing you to a world of information, or a subset of information that someone wants you to see? Is there any way for you to know?

Sources:

Kreimer, Seth F. "Censorship by Proxy: The First Amendment, Internet Intermediaries, and the Problem of the Weakest Link." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 155.1 (2006): 11-101. Print.

Chung, Jongpil. "Comparing Online Activities in China and South Korea: The Internet and the Political Regime." Asian Survey 48.5 (2008): 727-51. Print.