top of page
GS Shreya

Censorship: A Sign of the Times

The term ‘censor’ is derived from the Latin ‘censere’, that is, to assess. This, perhaps, begets the very subjective nature of this practice, lending itself to be a tool to enact the will of an authority. At the core of it, censorship is an act of imposition of an ideology with the specifics of such an ideology being rendered irrelevant.

Source: Livius // Roman coin depicting the Censor Lucius Vitellius


One of the duties of the Roman office of the Censor was what is termed as regimen morum, the supervision of mores or morals. It was commonplace for the Censors to extend their purview of morality to the private lives of Roman citizens, under the notion that one’s actions in private often shaped their life and behaviour in the public sphere ¹. The evolution of this position was what eventually formed the basis of modern-day censorship, especially on the part of the State.


Religion-driven censorship was a hallmark of the Middle Ages. In Europe, copies of sacred Jewish texts and commentaries were condemned as “perfidy” by the Christian church and even secular authorities and were confiscated and burned. Accusing someone of committing hearsay against the Church was the primary method of censorship and effectively served to damage their reputation in society. Religion has played a major role in the shaping of ideas of morality and acceptability. ²


It is worth examining how the ideals imbibed by the Roman Censors have subconsciously formed the pillars of modern censorship, despite a majority of the world publicly vouching for the right to privacy. Censorship driven by religion is merely one example of this continuity. Censorship as a weapon of political ambition is also most easily accepted when pushed under the guise of morality.


To truly understand the place censorship holds in the present day and how it shapes the way we interact with society as a whole, one needs to look into the various methods in which censorship is enacted and more importantly the difference in the influence of each of these methods.


CENSORSHIP OF FICTION


In 2021, the Texas House of Representatives passed the Texas House Bill 3979, known colloquially as the “critical race theory” bill as it sought to limit or prevent teaching students how racism has shaped legal and social systems in the United States of America ³. Shortly after the institution of this Act, Texas State Representative Matt Krause issued an inquiry into the details of the presence of over 850 books relating to race and the LGBTQ+ community, in Texas school districts . This was followed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott calling for the removal of all books showcasing “obscene” content. Over 400 books were pulled over concerns raised by the lawmakers, primarily affecting books pertaining to topics of race, orientation, gender identity and sex education .  


Censorship of fiction often intends to promote a certain, uniform image of society by deeming those who do not fit into that uniformity as immoral. By preventing the portrayal, representation, and communication of marginalised sections of society from reaching the majority, the authority seeks to maintain and further their marginalisation.


Source: IMDb // The poster of the film War and Peace by Anand Patwardhan


Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution allows for a film (as any other form of expression) to be censored if there is a reasonable belief that it may incite violence or disrupt public order . This censorship due to purported fear of the “hecklers’ veto”  has led to the Central Board for Film Certification imposing numerous, arbitrary cuts and directions to films they consider to be of controversial nature, such as ‘Udta Punjab’ and ‘War and Peace’ , and even outright bans on certain media such as the documentary ‘Ram ke Naam’


The Supreme Court of India has emphasised the positive obligation of the State to protect the right of expression, even through film ¹⁰. Thus banning or otherwise censoring a film due to fear of major oppositional violence is merely suppressing marginalised voices. Whether consciously or not, by choosing to violate its positive obligation, the State seeks to embolden only one particular viewpoint or narrative. The portrayal of a certain image of the country appears to take precedence over the portrayal of truth, reputation over reality, a reflection of the Indian culture of perception.


A common theme here is the act of taking away the agency of the people. By deeming all morally ambiguous or controversial works as morally objectionable, the authority erodes the populace’s ability and willingness to discern right from wrong for themselves. To be unable to practise such a skill in a low-stakes environment like a fictional setting is to arguably be robbed of this crucial capability in real life. 


The need to control what an individual consumes in their own time echoes suspiciously similar to the regimen morum of centuries ago. And yet, the censoring of prose, poetry, and film is still perceived as innocuous. The idea of preventing the normalisation of “wrong” ideas is a fairly acceptable notion for most. After all, why should someone who would never participate in immoral behaviour be concerned about the suppression of harmful elements in society? 


CENSORSHIP OF HISTORY


The censorship of history can be said to be enacted in two different ways, yet to almost the same effect. This can be through the amplification of historical accounts that are known to be biased or through retroactively changing or omitting legitimate historical accounts 


Initial accounts of historical events were often shaped by the views and prejudices of the victors. This can be further disambiguated into whether these prejudiced accounts were dispelled or sustained as time progressed. The phenomenon of knowingly and continually sustaining a largely censored version of history can be most clearly observed in the Chinese accounts of the Tiananmen Square Massacre.


Source: The Diplomat // The Tiananmen Square Massacre


The imposition of martial law, the opening of fire on civilians and the subsequent track-down and imprisonment of demonstrators in response to a peaceful protest changed the landscape in China concerning free speech. The Chinese government’s records on the issue, to date, do not include an official death toll. Efforts to discuss or even commemorate the incident, 35 years since, are met with further violence, suppression and imprisonment ¹¹. The creation of an atmosphere wherein the mere mention of an incident is taboo is effectively the creation of a world where the incident did not take place.



However, knowingly distorting history to pass on to future generations presents a far more sinister case. Dinesh Prasad Saklani, the director of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), recently stated “Why should we teach about riots in school textbooks? We want to create positive citizens, not violent and depressed individuals.”. This rather blasé statement reflects the stance that the NCERT, which is responsible for publishing the textbooks prescribed by the Central Board of Secondary Education, has taken with respect to the omission of various events in its history textbooks. Of particular controversy have been the decisions to delete chapters relating to the Mughal rule and decontextualization of the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. While done under the guise of reducing the academic burden on students, it is key to note how these decisions play into the stance the Indian government has previously taken on these issues. ¹²


This form of historical negationism ¹³ promotes a cognitive dissonance that asks a society to actively forget what has always been a fact, to instead uphold a version that fits an agenda at hand. It is a test of the willingness of the people to accept the distortion of history; a test of where the line lies for the manipulation of fact. 


Regardless of method, the censorship of history serves a singular purpose – to perpetuate a certain narrative as historical is to provide it legitimacy by word-of-mouth and prevalence, regardless of the veracity of the claims. 


CENSORSHIP OF MEDIA AND INFORMATION


Censorship and control of the information that reaches people is a crucial step in exercising control over their beliefs and such actions by a State often denote a marked democratic decline within a nation.


Source: PBS // Novaya Gazeta journalists and contributors who were killed


Forty-three journalists and media workers have been killed in Russia since Putin took power in 1999, with some being confirmed as being in direct retaliation to pieces critical of the government. Hundreds of journalists have been arrested and detained in Russia over the publication of pieces critical of the government. Russian lawmakers adopted two Federal Laws criminalising the spread of “knowingly false information” against the Russian Armed Forces and Russian State Bodies. This led to the shutdown of numerous news sources such as BBC Russia, Deutsche Welle and Euronews. Roskomnadzor, the Russian media regulator, has also cut off access to independent news sources. ¹


In India, the censorship of the press under the BJP government has been manifold, from aggressive policy changes to on-ground action against journalists. The Indian government has frozen government advertisements in major newspapers such as The Hindu and The Times of India, following these outlets publishing stories critical of the government ¹. The Information and Broadcast Ministry also amended guidelines relating to television broadcasts, giving much higher discretionary power to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Republic TV, a channel largely sympathetic to the ruling government, received a broadcasting licence within months whereas foreign media ventures, such as the BloombergQuint never received confirmation even years after submitting applications. ¹⁶


 Source: The Wire // Journalist and author Gowhar Geelani, photojournalist Masrat Zahra and The Hindu's Srinagar correspondent, Peerzada Ashiq against whom UAPA charges were filed


Beyond these policy changes, journalists have faced increased on-ground pressure, with 16 journalists being charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, under which they can be detained without trial or conviction ¹⁷. Over 40 journalists appeared on a list of persons who were potential targets of the spyware Pegasus, with this further being confirmed through forensic analysis. The Indian government has not explicitly denied the use of the Pegasus software despite its incongruence with Indian privacy laws ¹⁸. There has also been a marked increase in alleged tax raids on newsrooms and individual journalists, often those who have been vocally critical of the government. ¹⁹


The creation of a hostile atmosphere against journalists and media outlets postures a nation to move towards a world where criticism is not considered permissible. The push for opacity by a government, in the form of refusing press conferences and only platforming sympathetic media sources and scripted interviews, is a push for unquestioning acceptance. It is a concerning phenomenon that belies the deterioration of democracy by taking away people’s ability to access facts and opposing viewpoints.


CENSORSHIP OF SPEECH


The right to freedom of expression and free speech is one that is enshrined in international human rights law ²⁰ and in the domestic laws of several nations as well. Yet, governments often seek to circumvent this right to shut down dissent towards certain ideals. The aforementioned examples are all violations of the right to free speech, but the censorship of speech specifically focuses on the censorship of the voice of the common people, rather than the censorship of content consumed by them.


The most common form of censorship is taking away the people’s right to protest. Protests are the strongest tool the masses have to present their demands to the government, especially one that does not represent the will of the people. Consequently, the suppression of protests by branding them as unlawful and exo-communicating and isolating the demonstrators is a tactic commonly used to crush dissent.


Source: Reuters // Police detaining a pro-Palestinian protestor at UCLA


The United States saw a number of sit-in protests across college campuses in response to the military aid sent to Israel over the Israel-Palestine war. College students protested the US’ continued decision to supply weapons to Israel and many universities’ investments in key Israeli industries, in light of the mounting civilian death toll in Gaza. Across the country, the police response to these encampments was marked by violence and the use of excessive force. Wrongful arrests of students, faculty, and reporters on-site have been widely criticised for being a violation of the people’s First Amendment right to protest under the United States Constitution. ²¹


Source: The Indian Express // Police lathi-charge protestors in Haryana at the Farmers’ Protest


India, too, has seen its fair share of protests over the years, which have been met with similar responses from law enforcement. Protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act were curbed by a disproportionate police response, including the use of tear gas and unlawful entry of police into institutions where protests were held, such as the Jamia Millia Islamia University ²². The Farmers’ Protests in response to the controversial Farm Bill in 2021, and subsequent protests in 2024 saw the use of drones, tear gas shells, and plastic bullets against protestors, ultimately resulting in casualties ²³. The violent mobilisation of State machinery against the people demonstrates a concerning disregard for the political and human rights of citizens.


In the era of digital communication, the internet is a key resource for people to both obtain information and share their experiences. India has consistently led the list of countries that have imposed internet shutdowns, with 113 instances recorded in 2023 ²⁴. Revoking of internet access has been seen across the country, especially in light of major decisions being taken. The internet was suspended in Jammu and Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019, a shutdown which carried on for 18 months ²


The protests in Manipur did not reach the rest of the country and world until weeks after they had begun due to the imposition of an internet shutdown. Due to being cut off from the outside world, the people of Manipur could not document or communicate the atrocities enacted upon them during the ethnic violence that broke out, leaving them unable to hold perpetrators accountable ²⁶.


By snatching away a fundamental tool of expression, under the guise of the maintenance of peace, governments rob their citizens of their fundamental rights to life and personal liberty. A direct censorship of the voice of the people seems counterintuitive to the very idea of democracy itself, and it is the inevitable culmination of every other form of censorship.


CONCLUSION


Source: Medium


In an environment of excessive control, people still seek to express themselves within the bounds of what is “acceptable”. Self-censorship has been observed in the past, from the advent of the printing press, to the present, in the light of increasingly draconian internet privacy laws ²⁷. In a world where the punishment for stepping out of line is increasingly harsh, self-censorship becomes an indirect tool of State control, as well. It is perhaps the most insidious one, having instilled a framework of censorship in the very minds of the populace.


Media and fiction serve as our primary methods to communicate with and make sense of the world around us. History is the thread linking us to all that came before us and our speech is what bridges us to what shall come after. Human beings are social animals and our sustained existence has only been made possible by collectivity. Censorship seeks to take away a fundamental part of what makes us, us; it seeks to divide and isolate for personal gain. At some levels, it feels antithetical to the existence of humanity that was born out of shared knowledge and experiences.


As is the case with everything else, censorship is not an isolated phenomenon. It is one act, among many, that signals a changing landscape of civil and political rights. To look at what an authority seeks to censor is to look at what they believe is the most dangerous challenge to them. Censorship, funnily enough, reveals to us exactly what we need to know to gauge and handle the future that is to come; it is a sign of the times.


Article by:

GS Shreya,

Editor,

PES MUN Society.


67 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


For the Record

bottom of page