The Journey of Censorship
From the execution of citizens by their government to Trump being banned from twitter, just how far has censorship come?
Censorship, as defined by Oxford Languages, is “the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.”
Today, posts on social media are also being censored in a way. With former President Trump being banned on platforms including Twitter and Facebook, the topic is more relevant than ever. To better understand censorship today, it is essential to know about it’s past.
In the ancient world censorship took on a more simple and direct role. There was an officer of censor in ancient Rome (around 443 BCE), part of their job was to supervise the general public and hold people to a moral standard. This moral standard has greatly morphed over time. For example, History.com explains, in 399 BCE Socrates was executed for “failing to honor the Athenian gods and for corrupting the young”. Today we think of ‘censorship’ as blurring an image, bleeping out words, or deleting content off the internet. In a time before this technology, censoring was taking physical action against a person for something they had said or done.
Premodern times took on a similar form of censorship. Britannica says in the 17th and 18th centuries, “There was the effort to keep government from reviewing, before publication, any manuscript, and there was the effort to keep government from penalizing, after publication, any text that expressed forbidden sentiments”. Essentially, the public was trying to lessen the censorship power of the government had. Finding this balance between what should and should not be censored continues today.
English author, John Milton, wrote Areopagitica in 1644, arguing that writings should not be censored before publication, but criminal persecution can take place after it. He notes that it is good for mankind to be exposed to error, allowing virtue to be tested and strengthened. Today, this begs the question, what is the duty of each individual to sift though information and decide themselves what to think of it.
The modern world has a wide variety of censorship from county to country. For example, in the United States, the original 1932 version of the classic gangster film Scarface had to go through countless rounds of editing in order to comply with the censorship standards of film at the time. PBS says the goal of the censorship was to, “sanitize movies — no nudity, suggestive dancing, miscegenation, ridicule of religion, illegal drug use, or ‘objectionable’ language — and it also demands unsympathetic portrayals of criminals and minimal detail when brutal crimes are shown.” Movie censorship continued until 1952 when the supreme court granted films the protection of the first amendment, the freedom of speech.
While traditionally the government was the one doing the censoring, today it is in the hands of some private companies to decide what is and is not acceptable. Whether or not social media platforms should allow free speech is the million dollar question. Censoring users could greatly reduce the amount of disinformation as well as the speed at which it is spread. It could also potentially stop the organization of hate groups. That said, what is the place of the private companies stepping in and deciding what makes the cut?
The freedom of the press across the globe also shows today’s censorship clearly. Reporters Without Borders has a World Press Freedom Index that ranks the freedom of the press in each country, as well as an ‘abuse score’. Its purpose is to quantify abuse and violence against journalists and media outlets.
From a standard of morals meant to uphold, to something of a more oppressive sentiment, censorship has changed a lot, but so has the environment in which it exists. The technology today requires us to rethink our understanding of censorship and freedom of speech, as the internet can dramatically amplify the voice of a single person.
