Censorship is the removal of information from the public by a controlling group. This would not be one television station firing one individual; this would be a large group of television stations choosing to not broadcast information about something. For instance, if all the television stations in the country got together and decided to ban information relating to changes in the school systems about how sex education is taught, that is an example of censorship.
Only three reasonably-cohesive public institutions are capable of true censorship: the media, religious organizations, and the government. Of those three ONLY THE GOVERNMENT is legally forbidden to censor.
In media, if news organizations get together and agree to censor something – or agree to all report the same way on something – it may be illegal due to trust regulations. However, in most cases they can say or not say whatever they like.
Religious organizations are largely outside the law. Provided they don’t violate other laws, like inciting crime or plotting to harm others, they can censor whatever they like within the confines of their communities.
If You Are Censored
You may feel censored in other situations. For instance, I was once in a class where the professor was a complete – well. He was rapturous about his and only his interpretations of literature, and insisted that there was only one interpretation. I butted heads with him over and over, to the fascination of everyone else in the class. The day he skipped me when going through the class for reactions on Huckleberry Finn, I and my small group of supporters stood up and walked out. Just one of those college things, I suppose!
At the time, I certainly felt censored. But I wasn’t. This professor could not censor me because he was one guy. If I stood outside the classroom and lectured everyone else on what the true meanings of Huckleberry Finn were, he had no recourse. I was completely free to speak my mind without the bounds of the classroom.
But then he gave me a D grade, simply because I persisted in my disagreement in my papers and tests. Other professors looked at my essays and agreed with me that it was A or B work. In this case, he was using his limited power to harm me (and my GPA!).
In almost every case like this, whether it is the workplace, at school, or with an individual newspaper, there are recourses. At work, you should have a grievance procedure you can go through. At school, you can grieve – but you can also form networks of support with other professors and teachers who believe in you and your work. If a newspaper is harming you in this manner, you may be able to sue.
Another Case of Pseudo-Censorship: Print Media
Newspapers are much more free to publish or not publish items than professors are free to grade students. I once worked at a small free weekly paper that was completely advertiser-supported. Among our advertisers: phone sex and classified personals. These advertisers, for a small paper with decent circulation among the 18-24 segment, were very lucrative, and most weeks were the primary supporter of the paper.
But then local escort services and massage parlors started clamoring to advertise. The editor in chief, a very nice guy, called a general meeting of everyone from me, the lowly editorial assistant, up to the publisher to decide whether we wanted to carry these ads. With one or two salespeople dissenting, we all agreed: because of possible legal ramifications and also because we were trying to appeal to young families, we would not carry these advertisements.
The largest escort service’s owner pitched a fit when we rejected her ads. She marched her beachballesque body into our office, backed up by her very uncomfortable mountain-man enforcer looming in the background, and insisted to me that she had every right to run her advertisements and that she wanted me to fix it Right Now. I was speechless – torn between uncertainty and laughter because she looked so much like the medium in Poltergeist.
Fortunately, our editor in chief was there that day. He intervened, politely told them that it was an editorial decision, and that she could leave now or be escorted out by his friends the police officers eating in the restaurant next door.
And he was completely within his rights. Individual newspapers have every right to make individual editorial decisions. This paper made other controversial decisions. When one of our columnists – a gentleman who was not terribly stable – threatened the life of congressman Mitch McConnell in print, he was immediately, though with regrets, fired. Other ads were rejected, and stories pulled because of unexpected circumstances.
Not once did anyone file a suit against the paper. Why? Because there was no legal grounds for a suit.
Similarly, NBC was completely within its rights to fire Don Imus, or anyone else they want to fire. Why? Because they perceived him as a danger to their bottom line. They are a business. He was causing damage to their reputation. He had become more of a liability than an asset. So they fired him. Any news organization is within its rights to do the same, just as CBS fired Dan Rather, and earlier removed Bernard Goldberg because he’d published some things they didn’t appreciate.
This is not censorship. It is business. We have the right to say anything we wish to say in this great country, but we don’t have the right to stand on someone else’s soapbox to say it. The sooner we all get this straight, the sooner we can get down to business.