Suemya and Byanne's Censorship article Questions

1) Give a brief summary of your article, the type of censorship that it's addressing, and the different positions presented.

The article “Mein Kampf to be re-released with notes countering Hilter’s arguments” is simply what the title refers to. Mein Kampf (My struggles) is a recount of Hilter’s Memoirs when he was in jail and the Bavarian state finance ministry owns right over publications, which are soon to expire. The article explains this and also includes the fact that the book will be republished with added annotations, as the German authorities believe that it will be sending the wrong message to the international community. Also the authors/historians working on the project as the article states wish to, “which will include commentaries on the text that will seek to dissect and rubbish Hilter’s argument.”

The type of censorship that this article is censoring is falls under the category of political as Hilter is a very world known political figure. The article mainly suggests that the censoring of Hilter’s memoirs is going to be a step forward to censor the past and change the mindset of the future.

2) What is your opinion on the censorship issue raised in the article?  Explain your position.

The censorship issue was how Hitler’s views should be presented. The book was banned in Germany ever since 1945 because of the extreme view Hitler was revealing. This article wants to censor what Hilter meant by “Watering it down” and making the reader confused because they are looking at two different extreme points of view. We believe that censoring can be seen both beneficial and damaging depending on what is being censored. But both extreme sides of censoring and not can lead to a catastrophe and therefore there always needs to be a middle platform where the harmful things towards the majority of the community are censored and the others that don’t affect society aren’t.

3) As we saw in the debate, policies on censorship range widely in different countries.  Several fundamental questions about censorship came up such as:

    Is free speech a human right?

Yes, it is a god given right but the speaker must suffer the consequences if he/she/it affects a certain factor of society which takes it in a negative matter. This is because in addition to having the rights to speak you also have the rights to defend your views and take matters to court if necessary and that’s is the extent to which it is harming you in anyway, so yes it is considered a right.   

    Who has the right to determine what information is available to the public and how are those determinations made?

In our modern day societies the government seems to be the one controlling all the information going in and out if it decides to censor. This is not always the case, as extreme forms of censorship are not known in a lot of countries, so what determines the decisions usually are the majority people themselves. For example if something is harmful towards a religion or culture the people will all agree that this is something they do not want to see again and therefore should be censored. If these decisions were ever to be carried out then the government would provide the role of control and set out the boundaries censoring everything that needs to be censored.  

    What is the role of the media and to what extent is it obligated to provide information to the public?

Media is the working mind behind censorship with the ability to change/control people’s mind and opinions. In some countries there is no need for it to be censored as it is controlled by the government itself, but in other cases it doesn’t have attachments with the government therefore in order for the government system to remain in power whilst satisfying the people it enforces boundaries which the media agencies can still send information to the public without overstepping these boundaries laid out before them.   

What fundamental issues do you see raised by your article about free speech and censorship?

Since the article is focusing on political censorship free speech is not really discussing the right of free speech as it is more or less trying to control the thoughts of people over something that has already been said decades ago.  

4) Why do you think censorship is such a controversial issue? 

The reason why nowadays censorship is such an issue is because the world has never seen such large banks of information stored in these forms. These storages contain so much information that not all of it do good and some of it may do a lot of damage over good. Also the increasing of this knowledge may impact the way humans think and can control them in a way. Oppositely, many people believe that is a divine right to be able to view everything, and not have anything become censored off as it can impact ones knowledge. These two extreme sides make censorship such a controversial issue especially because no one can decide where the middle ground is on this huge spectrum.  

Censoring twitter in Thailand -Rawda & Fatma :)


1) The article "Thailand backs Twitter censorship policy" talks about how the Thai prime minister vowed to protect the monarchy over the internet. As twitter earlier this year had announced that they would permit country-specific censorship of content that could violate local laws. This caused a debate worldwide over the freedom of speech. The Thai prime minister stated that the Thai government would soon be contacting Twitter to "discuss ways in which they can collaborate". The Thai government made an agreement that a tweet from Thailand could be blocked at the request of an individual, a company, or the government. And when a tweet is blocked, it will be invisible to other users in Thailand however users in other countries can still see it. 



2) our opinion on this issue is that Thai people should have the right to express their thoughts on twitter just like other people from other countries. However Thai people should keep in mind that they have limits and should not tweet or publicize something against their government or country on twitter. 


3) Yes, free speech is a human right because people should have the right to express their thoughts freely. The government and the people of the country should be the group that determines what information is promoted. And to prevent any minor problem in allowing the public to determine then the majorities' determination is what should be taken into consideration by the government. The role of the media is to send out a certain message or information to the public, depending on the nation, the certain agency might be granted the whole freedom to provide any information to the people, as some of them have limits. It is obvious and logical to pass information the way it was taken yet this is not what is happening in the media today. 


4) As mentioned in the article, in China, the state-run Global Times also endorsed in an article, "it is impossible to have boundless freedom, even on the internet and even in countries that make freedom their main selling point," it stated. Therefore, we can see that different countries have different goals and priorities. Some governments think that a person's freedom is the most important thing and that this right shouldn't be taken away from the people. However, other countries think that the protection of their government and leader is the most important thing and this leads them into taking actions such as censoring what the citizens of the country say. 

1) Give a brief summary of your article, the type of censorship that it's addressing, and the different positions presented.
An over view of the article states that Iran is banning the Simpsons because they do not want their culture to be affected by the western society. In addition their goal is to not influence the younger generation with the western society. For example the article mentions the babie doll that is banned in iran simply because the children are not allowed to play with such figures that have their body exposed with tight cloths, but instead would let their children play with baggy cloths. 
2) What is your opinion on the censorship issue raised in the article?  Explain your position.
We think this is an example of one of Iran's religious based regulations that is known throughout the world as it was seen that the simpsons for them is considered an innapropriate show to be shown on TV, therefore we think that people should respect Iran's regulations because the residences have been following these regulations for a long period of time. 


3) As we saw in the debate, policies on censorship range widely in different countries.  Several fundamental questions about censorship came up such as:
    Is free speech a human right?
Definefetly free speech is a human right all around the world but this "human right" varies from country to country. Some countries such as America, UK, and Sweden have much more freedom of speech where as other countries such as Iran and DPR Korea still do have freedom of speech but to less extends when compared to other western countries. 
    Who has the right to determine what information is available to the public and how are those
    determinations made?
In most countries information gets montiored by the government and at that stage the information that is inappropriate gets censored and the information that does not harm the country and its people get to be displayed. 
    What is the role of the media and to what extent is it obligated to provide information to the public?
Now days media is the voice of the people, and people try to be heard through media. Although media is a really strong weapon, many governments censor the most things that may harm them or their reputation so that the people wouldn't go wild and start a riot. 

What fundamental issues do you see raised by your article about free speech and censorship?
As read in the article the only reason why Iran banned the Simpsons was because the government did not want their people to be influenced by the western culture and society. To Iran, being influenced by other countries was always a big issue and it still is hence they are banning the simpsons shows and toys from Iran.
4) Why do you think censorship is such a controversial issue?  
Censorship is a controversial issue due to the fact that goverments of all countries always try to hide what is happening behind the scene because they know that if the residence of the country found out about it, they would be very bad. Also in some countries such as Iran they try to avoide any influences by the western society because they do not want to become like them, although to many of us that may seem very weird. 

Al Jazeera Articles

I was recently on the Al Jazeera website in which I found these two interesting articles that have to do with two of the countries we chose for our MUN debate. The first one is about the solider who leaked documents onto the wikileaks site and the other is about the James Murdoch trial and how media and politics effect each other greatly.
1) http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/04/2012424171319480942.html
2) http://www.aljazeera.com/video/europe/2012/04/201242455722955950.html

Censorship Article Answers - Oswin & Zaza

1)     Give a brief summary of your article, the type of censorship that it's addressing, and the different positions presented.

The article is basically about Twitter starting to censor tweets on a case to case basis. By bringing censorship in, more countries should feel comfortable allowing its citizens to use Twitter on a daily basis. Instead of erasing a tweet completely, the tweet will be censored with a notice, depending on the country. This type of censorship is internet based. On one hand Twitter has done this, aiming to expand into more countries, and thus more hits/money. On the other hand, some claim that this weakens Twitter’s commitment to free speech. 

2)     What is your opinion on the censorship issue raised in the article?  Explain your position.

Both of us believe that what Twitter has decided is fair as it caters to everyone’s’ need. However, if the censorship is pushed any further, then it becomes more restrictive and thus going against the original purpose of Twitter.

3)     As we saw in the debate, policies on censorship range widely in different countries.  Several fundamental questions about censorship came up such as:

a.     Is free speech a human right? Yes.

b.     Who has the right to determine what information is available to the public and how are those determinations made?

A collaboration between the government and the public should determine what is available.  Like with ethics, it is the agreement in the majority that determines what should or shouldn’t be published.

c.     What is the role of the media and to what extent is it obligated to provide information to the public?

The role of the media is to be a informative service agency. The truth is hard. It is ideally designed to present any information to the population without manipulating the information in any shape or form. However, the reality is that due to corporate sponsors or political hosts, the media is manipulated and it’s purpose is contaminated.

d.     What fundamental issues do you see raised by your article about free speech and censorship?

                                               i.     The right to talk about whatever and where ever.

                                             ii.     The existence of laws in different countries which disallow certain views in the way they’re expressed

                                            iii.     The willingness to compromise free speech for more business

4)     Why do you think censorship is such a controversial issue?  

Because the line between free speech and expression, and totalitarian restriction of the same is extremely faded and ambiguous.  Perspective on free speech differs from person to person, and country to country. Thus, conflicts arises.

Sara&Sheikha's Answers Thing :)

1)   In summary, one of the US soldiers sent the images of other US soldiers posing with dead afghan insurgents to news agencies.  The photos were very controversial, even media analysts didn’t agree on whether it was the right thing to publish the images.  The type of censorship it addresses is the act to censor violent and graphically natural pictures that reflect a bad image of the US soldiers to their people. The different positions presented are that, on one hand, media agencies found that it was necessary - as the united states are big on freedom of speech – that the public are aware of the unethical acts of the US soldier and the occurring war. Of normality, the US defense department- the pentagon, found that it would “cause needless casualties” and would ruin the reputation of the US soldiers.

2)   As disturbing as the photographs may be, it is of the public’s right that they are aware of the reckless behavior of these soldiers, to understand what is happening exactly behind the scenes and therefore the people can choose their stand on the issue. The USA have the capability to vote for whether or not their citizens would like their soldiers to carry on this war. If they are aware of what is going on, they could put a stop to the war.

3)   Yes, free speech is a human right because every person is responsible for what they say and do. In the regards to the United States, the pentagon filter what and determine what information is available to the public. How these determinations are made? It all depends on the image of what is being presented gives to the USA. Since the USA is very big on freedom of speech, media agencies did not take into consideration what the pentagon had to say therefore went on and published the photographs.

4)   Censorship is such a controversial issue because sometimes it is good to censor something that may protect the people from the negative influence, but in the other hand, sometimes censoring does limit a person from knowing what they should and have the right to know which makes this issue even more controversial. 

Sara&Sheikha's Answers to censorship

1)   In summary, one of the US soldiers sent the images of other US soldiers posing with dead afghan insurgents to news agencies.  The photos were very controversial, even media analysts didn’t agree on whether it was the right thing to publish the images.  The type of censorship it addresses is the act to censor violent and graphically natural pictures that reflect a bad image of the US soldiers to their people. The different positions presented are that, on one hand, media agencies found that it was necessary - as the united states are big on freedom of speech – that the public are aware of the unethical acts of the US soldier and the occurring war. Of normality, the US defense department- the pentagon, found that it would “cause needless casualties” and would ruin the reputation of the US soldiers.

2)   As disturbing as the photographs may be, it is of the public’s right that they are aware of the reckless behavior of these soldiers, to understand what is happening exactly behind the scenes and therefore the people can choose their stand on the issue. The USA have the capability to vote for whether or not their citizens would like their soldiers to carry on this war. If they are aware of what is going on, they could put a stop to the war.

3)   Yes, free speech is a human right because every person is responsible for what they say and do. In the regards to the United States, the pentagon filter what and determine what information is available to the public. How these determinations are made? It all depends on the image of what is being presented gives to the USA. Since the USA is very big on freedom of speech, media agencies did not take into consideration what the pentagon had to say therefore went on and published the photographs.

4)   Censorship is such a controversial issue because sometimes it is good to censor something that may protect the people from the negative influence, but in the other hand, sometimes censoring does limit a person from knowing what they should and have the right to know which makes this issue even more controversial.