There was an article recently published in the New York Times featuring a photo that hasn't been seen since 2004. The photo shows soldiers returning home in their American flag draped coffins. Taking these sort of photos has been against the law on and off since 1991. The article covers two schools of thoughts. One of them being the supposed reason the government has banned these photos. Their official statement is that the photos are banned to protect the privacy of the families of the soldiers. However, others believe that it is the governments way of manipulating our view of the war in Iraq. Perhaps the government thinks if we don't see the human cost of war, our perceptions will change.
This article relates greatly to our class and journalism as a whole. One of the biggest problems we face as journalists is deciding whether or not we are allowed to print a story. In high school, the principal has the right to decide what goes in and what stays out of print if he thinks a certain story will detract from the educational environment. As students, we want to read stories about the big things going on involving students. Things like violence or drugs and alcohol are the kind of things we can't write about with the freedom we want. Outside of school, in a real newspaper, certains kinds of stories cannot be written. If a story talks about war or something that upsets the people who pay for the paper to be printed then people can lose their jobs. The thing with censorship is, once you allow one thing to be censored it just opens the door for hundreds of others. I believe as journalists we have an obligation to print the truth and sugar coating things doesn't help anyone. Just recently journalists had to be careful of how they worded the news on the recession for fear of freaking people out. But was it really helping anyone by lying about the extent of the recession?
The questions I am left with are:
Does censorship really help the public? Is ignorance really bliss, or will it just hurt us in the long run?
Is the government careful about media coverage on the war in Iraq because of the media causing people to protest in Vietnam?
Does the government really want to protect the families or are they just trying to control our perceptions of the war?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I really like your questions. Part of me believes that censorship is beneficial. But as you said, censoring one thing leads to hundreds. Things get out of control, and pretty soon we don't have a free press anymore, and that's a crime.
ReplyDeleteYour questions have really good points. I dont think ignorance is bliss. We as the public need to know what is going on, and journalists are some of the only people who will tell us. If the government censors what we right then it goes against the freedom of the press which our country is so proud of.
ReplyDeleteHowever, others believe that it is the governments way of manipulating our view of the war in Iraq. Perhaps the government thinks if we don't see the human cost of war, our perceptions will change.
ReplyDeleteTRU DAT
until i read yours there was a lot of points I never thought of. The whole censorship we as well have, how we have to watch out and pay attention to what we write in fear that it may get cut by the principal. You touched on a lot of strong points that I did not truely understand at first. Nice Job!
ReplyDelete"Is ignorance really bliss, or will it just hurt us in the long run?" Is something I often ponder. I belive that the truth really does "set you free". Even though the truth sometimes hurts I think its necassary and knowing the truth about the war is without a doubt important to everyone.
ReplyDeleteIgnorance is bliss to those who are not ignorant, especially those in power. Orwell's '1984' is a must-read for journalists; it's almost something I should require...Hmmmmmm... Censorship by the government can only lead to one place - manipulation (see Hitler, Germany, World War II). You got some people thinking Megan - nice job!
ReplyDeletePeople choose to be ignorant because they teach themselves to believe what they want almost like censoring themselves to the public.
ReplyDelete