Ethics Of Censorship

Censorship is a practice of examining writings or movies and taking out things considered offensive or immoral. There are several different types of censorships out there, religious censorship, media censorship, art censorship, government censorship, and warfare censorship. Ethics can also affect someone’s view of writings and movies.
Ethics are moral principles that govern a person's or group's behavior. Certain censorships need ethics and others don’t. Government censorship is an example of one that does not need ethics. There are certain things that the government cannot tell us because of national security. Anything that’s put our nation’s safety at risk cannot be open to the public. If certain information is open to the public our enemies …show more content…
They were censored for so long by England they thought it was a good idea for everyone to be able to say what they want, but over the years the amendment has changed so has out country. Our country has advanced in getting information to the people. Each story now goes into more detail then what it used to. People are going out and finding more information about, government, celebrities, and medical information. With people going out and getting more information on these topics, the people interoperated the amendment differently and wrote the news so it’s not ethically wrong. Like the government, there can’t be things said about our nation’s security that will put us at risk. I believe these changes are good for our nation to keep us safe and to help keep our nation morally …show more content…
Kuhlmeier case is a prime example of how there are things that should not be put in newspaper. This case was about how students in Journalism class at Hazelwood East High School. Some students wrote two articles, one about teen pregnancy and the second was about divorced families. The students did not release any names in the pregnancy article, but the principle thought that students could tell who the pregnant women were by the way the questions were asked in the article. In the second article about divorce the principle was worried about the parents. The principle believed the students did not have enough time to rewrite the article so he cut them from the print. The students then sued the school for direct violation in the first amendment. The court agreed that the students’ rights were violated, but also agreed that the newspaper could censor only when necessary to avoid material and substantial interference with school work, discipline, or the rights of others. I believe that the principle did the right thing. The students in the article would eventually get found out and get made fun of. This way the students were protected. This is how our newspaper, The Torch,