Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient." Censorship can be conducted by governments, private institutions, and corporations. Wikipedia
Censorship is unconstitutional. "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech." Those are the exact words of the first amendment in our constitution. Because of this law, it is illegal for the government to censor or regulate speech.
Censorship by medium[edit]
Art[edit]
Art was often used as propaganda in Europe, often to point out political scandals but also to spread patriotism in times of need.[78] More specifically, caricature was often used to satirize these events and people and bring attention to the artists' perspectives.[79] Although censorship laws changed based on the stability of the monarchy and their opinions of the citizens, Britain was one of the European countries with the least amount of censorship in this area. During the French Revolution, Britain was in fact the only country where such propaganda was free and legal. The most famous British caricaturists at the time included Isaac Cruikshank, James Gillray, and Thomas Rowlandson. Although all three caricaturists had different perspectives and opinions, they were the frontrunners in the push towards patriotism of the United Kingdom when the UK faced attack from Napoleon.[80]
Film[edit]
Main article: Film censorship in the United Kingdom
See also: British Board of Film Classification
Internet[edit]
Main article: Internet censorship in the United Kingdom
Freedom of expression and protection of privacy over the Internet is guaranteed by UK law. Nonetheless, since about 2010 there has been a shift toward increased surveillance and police measures. Combating terrorism and preventing child abuse have been widely used by state agencies and private commercial actors (e.g. Internet service providers) to justify the implementation of interception and direct filtering measures. Nevertheless, in 2010 the OpenNet Initiative (ONI) found no evidence of technical filtering in the political, social, conflict/security, or Internet tools areas. The UK openly blocks child pornography websites, for which ONI does not test.[81]
98.6% of UK internet traffic consume a service called the child abuse image content list which uses data provided by the Internet Watch Foundation to identify pages judged to contain indecent photographs of children.[82][83][84] When such a page is found, the system creates a "URL not found page" error rather than deliver the actual page or a warning page.
In July and again in October 2011, the UK High Court ruled that BT Retail must block access to a website (newzbin.com) which "provides links to pirated movies".[85][86] In September 2011, in response to the court ruling and with encouragement from government, leading UK ISPs are reported to have privately agreed in principle to quickly restrict access to websites when presented with court orders.[87] In May 2012 the High Court ordered UK ISPs to block The Pirate Bay to prevent further copyright infringing movie and music downloads facilitated by the website.[88][89] Soon after, the High Court ordered UK ISPs to block other websites linking to, or endorsing online "piracy", such as KickAss Torrents (kat.ph).
Since the end of 2013 a rolling program has been in place to ensure that most households in the UK have pornography and other material (such as suicide, alcohol and violence-related content) filtered from the Internet by default unless a household chooses to receive it. This follows an announcement by the Prime Minister David Cameron on 22 July 2013.[90]
In addition to Internet filtering, the UK also prosecutes those who are alleged to be violating hate speech laws online. In particular, the Communications Act 2003 outlaws the act of sending "by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character."[91] In 2017, Alison Saunders, the director of public prosecution, announced the allocation of additional resources for enforcing it and the intent to treat online speech as equivalent to a conversation in person.[92] In 2018, the Sentencing Council began deliberating on whether to increase the maximum sentence for suspects with many social media followers.[93] Digital secretary Margot James also outlined a plan to increase government regulation of social networks with possible penalties including 4% of the firm's global turnover.[94] Culture secretary Matt Hancock elaborated on this plan and likened it to the controversial German law NetzDG. He was criticized for saying that a refusal by ten technology companies to send representatives to a meeting he held gave him "a big impetus to drive these proposals to legislate through."[95]
Some regulation of the Internet is coordinated through an online police presence. The Metropolitan Police Service's Twitter account for example, which has been online since 2009, has been applauded for its responsiveness.[96] It has also been condemned for what critics see as police intimidation. In 2016, former IT consultant Paul Perrin expressed resentment over the level of attention given to LGBT issues in the news. When an officer from an LGBT-specific account of the MPS joined the discussion, he or she allegedly revealed knowledge of Perrin's family members.[97]
👿💩👎
