Censorship Promotes Ignorance

Censorship promotes ignorance.

Censorship attempts to discourage or prevent access to media. Media contains information.

Failure to attain information perpetuates ignorance of that information. Preventing access to media prevents access to information. Censorship prevents access to media.


Censorship promotes ignorance.

No logical path can circumvent this simple truth. You may argue that most media contains inappropriate, false, irrelevant or irreverent information.

I neither deny nor admit the validity or value of information. I merely state that lack of information through censorship causes ignorance of that information.

You may argue that we are better off without some information.

I doubt the truth of this, but if in truth we are better off without some information, I question who has the wisdom and objectivity required to decide the information we are better off with and the information we are better off without.

Censors must access information to know the inappropriate qualities, false-hoods, irrelevance and irreverence of the information. If censors honestly, from direct contact, label media as inappropriate, false, irrelevant or irreverent, then the censors must have accessed the information. To allow a small group access to all information so they may restrict the amount of information available to the remainder of the population seems incompatible with the idea of a free society.

In a society that allows a minority to determine the level of ignorance to which the majority is subjected, who assigns the elite group? Who determines who sees all that they may keep the remainder in the dark? Who decides what is appropriate, true, relevant or reverent?

What criteria has been developed to determine how ignorant the general public should be?

Who developed the criteria?

You may argue, there is information that must be considered inappropriate for children.


If a child has the intellect needed to understand concepts and situations, then it must be time to introduce that child to those concepts and situations; to encourage the child to learn the social consequences, individual responsibilities and acceptable responses to those concepts and situations.

Ignorance is neither innocence nor bliss.

Rather than censor books, videos, photographs, movies, plays et al, perhaps we should teach students to interpret media and encourage our children to learn the art of applying discretion and proper response to inappropriate, deceiving, irrelevant and irreverent material. Imagine a culture comprised of people who make informed decisions about content they have directly experienced in contrast to a culture who day-to-day live the dark ignorance of censorship.

(Teaching people discretion where media is concerned would destroy many popular news sources but you have to break a few eggs … )

All censorship including the censorship of political correctness, the censorship of Church, the censorship of State, and especially, the censorship imposed by multinational corporations leads to ignorance of citizens.

We cannot afford more ignorance and should sense developing tragedy when companies we view as champions of quality let us down; when companies we look to for information products cave to invisible censors; censors who ignorantly deem themselves qualified to determine what you and I can read and watch.

Ignorance does not ignite the human spirit.

Long shadows dim our potential as free, creative and productive citizens; shadows cast from iron walls erected by champions of ignorance, champions we did not choose, champions claiming to protect us from ourselves without asking.

Champions who continually and deceptively promote themselves as mainstream.

Sounds like Science Fiction but it is right here, right now.

Censorship leads to ignorance.

Censorship is on the rise.

Ignorance blooms.

  • http://www.booalready.com/ boo

    In the media and the mainstream I agree. However, there are some settings in which communication should be limited. For example schools could use tiered filtering of the internet as opposed to 100% filters. And intra-office email or personal email should be reasonably free from spam upon request. Things like that. Things where some opportunist would use every freedom to bilk/indoctrinate people. Still, I think they have the right to send their information but we have and should have the right to shut it out or down for ourselves and our children as we see fit. And we do have those rights. But I get what you mean overall. Censorship isn’t a cut and dried thing and for the most part we must take the risks with the benefits or lose the right to know anything at all.

    • Chrome

      I took time to replay to this so I could think it though.

      I agree, you should be able to define your own limits and filters … but how do you do it intelligently if you do not have a chance to compare, under guidance from a guide, material of all kinds? I do not propose we toss children to the wolves but I also do not see how we can prepare children for the great variety of Reality without exposing them, in the learning environment, to the great variety of Reality.

      • http://cow.chromepoet.com Chromepoet

        Our education system focuses on what to think, with lower emphasis on how to think and still lower emphasis on why to think. These priorities seem out of balance and directly related to the issue. A person who knows how to approach material and why it is necessary to consider, in contrast to react, to material is better equipped to deal with censored material than a person ignorant of censored content who stumbles on to censored material.

    • http://cow.chromepoet.com Chromepoet

      I agree there are sticky areas but stick to my point that censorship perpetuates ignorance. In our current society parents have a right to further censor what their children see but parents do not have the right to replace expurgated textbooks …

  • Pingback: Ignorance is contentedness at A Thousand Words()

© 2008-2012 Chromia Poetics