Media plays an essential role in disseminating information in our culture through the means of broadcasting. Information and ideas have the ability to reach and penetrate the public through broadcasted press such as television set, radio, internet, and etc. However, there are restriction and limitation regarding the amount of truth that may be implemented that is certainly how censorship insurance plan comes about. So what is censorship policy? Censorship guidelines are insurance policies that are manufactured to filter this content in media that can be considered as hypersensitive, harmful, unacceptable and even harmful. On the other hand, there is independence of expression but precisely what is freedom of manifestation? Based on Google, the meaning of freedom appearance is the independence to speak openly without censorship or limitation, or both. That is only providing if the talk or act will not cause issue or pose any hazard to the public's pursuits. Freedom of appearance also works as a route that allows the general public to words their viewpoints and views.
Based on my understanding in Broadcasting Action 1988, I've to disagree with the affirmation because liberty of manifestation and censorship coverage are both essential to a country's development and expansion. Censorship plan is essential to mass media because material that are printed through the multimedia should always be checked out and filtered to be able to prevent damaging and misleading contents to reach the public. Instances are sex-related moments, assault and gore displays, and some to the extent of triggering racial controversy on the list of people. It really is true that the material found in media aren't 100% true and genuine; However if too much real truth and info face the general public, then how certain are we that the general public will be ready to accept all the reality?
Secondly, independence of expression is essential for a democratic country to expand and develop succeedingly with no abuse of ability. Freedom of appearance also allow different views and thoughts to be voiced out to the public and a country such as Malaysia that has individuals of diverse race, religious beliefs, and culture can discuss their beliefs and be more aware. In addition, freedom of appearance has many beneficial effects to society. Flexibility of expression also opens chance of citizens to take part in decision making of the united states such as the rights to vote. Furthermore, individuals can tone of voice out their thoughts and thoughts and opinions freely without being judged. We make reference to freedom of appearance rather than freedom of speech because it is more accurately conveyed that it does not have to be words that is said but by the serves that we do.
However, flexibility of expression could cause harm to others and if it is not handled properly, libel and slander might occur and conflict may happen. A good example would be the circumstance of Wee Meng Chee aka Namewee that has caused a racial controversy by placing a video of our own countrywide anthem with racial slur in it. Which means this is why freedom of expression should be manipulated though it is necessary for a democratic modern culture. As we can easily see, freedom of expression and censorship insurance policy synchronizes jointly and a democratic country cannot grow with just one single and without the other.
That boils until, is all of this restriction and limitation really necessary and needed? I will say it's very important to have the ability to balance both independence of appearance and censorship insurance plan. We need to have strong moral worth to become able to filter contents that are useful and contents that may be harmful and malicious. We the people of the country are in fact the reason for all the conflict and controversy that has occurred in our region. As long as we are not educated with proper moral ideals and ethics, there will be problems with respect to censorship insurance policy and freedom manifestation. There's a expressing: "With great vitality, comes great responsibility". Predicated on that quotation, I believe both flexibility of manifestation and censorship insurance plan can be a very helpful tool if we were to make use of it prudently but it can also be a very detrimental weapon if we do not imply wisdom in deploying it.
There must be boundaries and limitation pertaining to freedom of appearance because more and more individual are beginning to rise up and make a stand by voicing out their judgment. It is a good thing that we are able to listen and talk about different views and thoughts and opinions. If freedom of expression is employed with the purpose of assisting others and delivering unity then those kinds of serves and speeches should not be blocked and limited. A very good example regarding good use of liberty of manifestation is the problem of Martin Luther Ruler. Quoting from his speech, he said that we should face hostility with peace. If the general public can have a mature and rational thinking like Martin Luther Ruler then freedom of expression can lead to a very important thing.
The federal should control the general public from providing hate speech nevertheless they shouldn't restrict and stop the general public from expressing genuine thoughts and opinions or we as a nation would always be distorted and blinded with lays. The truth of Irene Fernandez has sparked up an extremely sensitive issue among the public. Irene Fernandez published a written report on the living conditions of the migrant staff entitled "Misuse, Torture and Dehumanized Conditions of Migrant Staff in Detention Centres" and she was detained and incurred for maliciously posting false news. Do you consider it is good for a female that basically defended the privileges of migrant personnel to be under the longest trial in Malaysia history?
Malaysia is regarded as a democratic country with variety of races, religious beliefs, and culture and Malaysia supports freedom of manifestation but the fee of Irene Fernandez has bring about confusion to the general public. It is stated that we have the freedom of expression but the arrest of Irene Fernandez has proven that we do not necessarily have the liberty of expression rather it is merely a cover up done by the federal government. We people make the federal government so henceforth if we can turn into a smart and developed world, then freedom of manifestation and censorship policy can be considered a channel for all of us to share values and opinion without having to worry that issues might spark.
I will end this article with a question. Can our voices be observed fairly despite all of this restriction and limitation?