Good Censorship, Bad Censorship ?
Are all forms of censorship wrong? Are there some that are more permissible than others?
NowLebanon points out the difference between censoring the DaVinci Code and censoring Persepolis:
Censorship is always a divisive issue, a tool that is often the hallmark of repression and authoritarianism – we saw it with Lebanon’s equally bigoted banning of the Di Vinci Code in 2006, over the film’s controversial treatment of Christianity – but this instance was all the more sinister in that it was carried out to protect the delicate sensibilities of a foreign, rather than Lebanese entity. And not just any foreign entity: one that is actively working to impose itself on Lebanon, through massive spending, military training and political interference in Lebanon’s Hezbollah-led opposition.
But before you get all carried away and righteous about all censorships being wrong on principle, I offer you a challenge: Fitna.
Should it be censored or not?
Do you like this post? Would you like to be always updated with new posts on this website? If so, please subscribe to this blog's RSS feed? (tell me more)Share This Post:
Print it: Email it:
-->
Discussion
Comments are disallowed for this post.
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I blog in The Beirut Spring about Lebanese society and politics. I started in February 2005 after the killing of P.M. Rafik Hariri.
Subscribers so far:
Latest Posts
March 1, By Mustapha
February 15, By Mustapha
February 14, By Mustapha
November 16, By Mustapha
Lebanese Bloggers
Middle Eastern Bloggers
Blog Featured In
Today In Lebanon (NOW)
Naharnet RSS Feed
Yalibnan RSS Feed
Latest Lebanese News
RSS Subscribers
Categories
- No categories
© 2009 The Beirut Spring, a Lebanese Blog.
“Censorship like charity should start at home; but unlike charity it should stop there.(period)”
Now all hate speech needs to come with a disclaimer for warned adults (nothing censored,,,nothing).
Censorship is the best advertisement for the censored object.
It brings people to be curious about it so it s someone a promotional vector as well :)
No, absolutely not. I saw the movie, and I can definitely see how it would be offensive to any Muslim, but in my opinion at least, censorship is never the solution. There are hundreds of people like Wildrers out there, you’re bound to run into them or their beliefs eventually, so pretending the problem isn’t there isn’t the answer. The smart way to respond would be to do a movie that would outline the goodness of Islam, for example.
I was so pissed off when The Da Vinci Code was censored. Okay, even if it may offensive to me, I have the right to read/see it, then decide for myself. Nobody has the right to decide that for me.
Fitna makes a lot of people uncomfortable because it has a lot of truth (and some crap). How many times have each of us heard hate speech from the loudspeakers of mosques? Enough is enough. Geert Wilders is an idiot, but the movie is not entirely idiotic.
Fitna was a boring movie, one that contained the same series of images we are all used to seeing, especially regular readers of blogs, while the only thing distinguishing it from a U.S presidential campaign ad was that Wilders’ argument is directed at the entire religion and not just at an identified radical strain.
It should not be banned, both on principle and because it isn’t that offensive.
I haven’t seen Fitna yet.
But I do trust the legal system in Holland, and if the movie contains some illegal hatred stuff, it will be banned and makers of it will be punished.
Most important thing is not to have a violent reaction like in the karikaturs, since that is the political intention of this movie.
I hope muslims won’t be stupid enough to react in a barbaric way.
Though they are giving death threats to websites that wanna broadcast this movie which is shameful.
Let us learn from the embarrassment that muslims suffered after the death fatwa for Sulman Rushdie for writing a stupid, unimportant, irrelevant book “satanic verses”.
[...] Beirut Spring posts about “good censorship” versus “bad censorship” and on the difference between censoring the Da Vinci Code and censoring Persepolis in Lebanon. Share This [...]
The right of absolute freedom of speech has really truly never existed in any country in the world, even Western ones.
The vast majority of democracies in the world have some sort of censorship law. The United States for instance censors MANY things including libel, sex, drugs, and violence on TV, profane language on the TV and radio, etc. There is also something called “hate speech” and discrimination.
Most countries in Europe ban denying the holocaust or other forms of hate speech. Turkey bans “insulting Turkishness.” French bans many forms of religious expression in the public sphere – such as the old controversy regarding headscarves and Christian crosses. Israel has a censor who censors newspapers.
This taboo with censorship is often quite odd. It is odd coming from people who say they are proponents of freedom yet absolutely oppose economic freedom. The same people calling for completely free speech do not support the notion of freedom of property and often support the high-tax welfare states of the world and Keynesian economic planning.
The same is the case in the Middle East. Instead of having a discussion on privatizing Lebanon’s telecom system and other parts of the economy, joining the WTO, and increasing economic freedom, we have a discussion on what types of censorship should be allowed. There are priorities, censorship doesn’t build a nation but economic freedom builds prosperity.
Instead of banning why not creatively reflect a positive image and more, adopt it for real! Fitna same as Satanic Verses would’ve passed totally unoticed had they not been given unecessary propaganda by those who want to defend Islam.
i disagree with AbuHatem…