Silencing The Voice

Censorship tapes an invisible band over the mouth and only allows for selected utterances to escape. Censorship can be seen as infringing upon one’s human rights to freedom of speech. The phrase “freedom of speech” suggests that one has the right to say whatever comes to mind. However, this is certainly not the case. It can be understood though why there is a filter on what we (as citizens) are allowed to say or not say; if each individual were allowed to go around expressing everything that they felt, there would be a lot of hate speech. So, from another point of view, censorship serves to protect those on the receiving end of the voice. But even so, if a transgression takes place, surely that voice and the story it seeks to tell should be heard.

The limitation of state censorship spreads far and wide; across the television, radio and newspapers, it can therefore be seen that the new form of media, for example: the internet: blogging are breaking these bonds. Individuals have now got the space to tell their story “like it is” or is it? The situation in Iran proves how state censorship interferes by silencing the people’s voice. The fact that the media is censored in Iran shows how limited the citizens in Iran are, the news that they receive have been carefully selected; with the elections that took place, it could be described as being unfair. The state only gave their citizens the information that THEY wanted their citizens to have. In this sense the state guides their citizens as to what they should think! Irregularities in the recent Iranian election even shows how this infringement of freedom of speech also steps on violating a “supposed” democratic election.

Regarding the You tube clip, Carroll felt that his voice was not being heard and that United Airlines were ignoring his dissatisfaction with their service. He therefore posted videos of this dissatisfaction, to bring light to the public’s eye of United Airline’s treatment of one’s property. By doing so, the public is now aware of what happened and they also have the space to respond to what had happened. Some bloggers responded by saying that Carroll should not receive compensation if he did not take proper precautions in putting his guitar in a flight case. Some found his song to be very entertaining and believe that United Airlines should pay for Mr Carroll’s “smashed guitar”.

Regarding the incident with Ms Bonnen, one can see that one’s phrases and utterances carry a heavy weight. The Horizon Group Management sued Ms Bonnen for “tweeting” that there was mould in her apartment. So what is tweeting? It could be seen as the cyber world of a coffee shop with a group of friends just having a chat. However, can “tweeting” be considered to be publishing? Horizon seems to think so. The Horizon Group Management believes that their good name has been tarnished. Looking at it from Ms Bonnen’s point of view, one can see it as Ms Bonnen just passing a comment about her living condition. From both instances, one can see that “new media” gives voice to what would otherwise not be heard.

When an individual or group feels that their name has been defamed, they could sue for a lawsuit and have the party that caused the defamation to publish a public apology.