What Entertainment Does In A Country, Censorship In America & Europe

Censorship is critical to how a country appears on the world stage. In America entertainment as an industry surpasses all other countries in the Western Ally states. Because the general public is prone to spend more on their favorite cultural icon's products than say donate to their favorite politicians the industry as a whole comes under a lot of heat from those very figures who run the country. Entertainment and past-time (an outdated term) has never seen such a high standing in western history. It's still growing too in all sectors. (Although the music industry has taken hit after hit since the internet exploded.)

Censorship varies in America and Europe. America has the lax end of the deal while allowing curse words on the air occasionally and ever pushing the boundaries of public sexuality. A lot of censorship has to do with marketing, as how a product is marketed and to whom will determine how harsh the censors will go on the manufacturer. So it's a balance and oftentimes a play-by-play call on the censors' part on how they rate an entertainment product and allow it's sale and distribution. The flexibility of the internet combined with the 1st Amendment in America has all but pushed the censors aside as small business takes the greater portion of artists attempting to push the boundaries of taboo and decency.

In Europe the woman figure is not censored and oft times encouraged in an artists portfolio. Lewd language is entirely missing in European entertainment. The greater share of the foul-mouthing remains an American tradition. It seems that the more and more I give this my deeper attention the more it appears that Europe entertainment encourages heterosexuality while (woe is me) American censors encourage the opposite.

In a country without movie stars, rock stars, circus performers, huge celebrities and so forth their national integrity stays intact. There is less danger for the disruption of their genetic heritage or an influx of immigrants to displace their less fortunates. In essence, entertainment gives the impression of a welcomeness and in a way is an advertisement for tourism even if the message to "visit our country or please move here!" isn't included.

In America, where racial mixture is far more common than in Europe, the face of entertainment becomes random and less centralized on a single nationality or race. To a European this may appear odd or confusing as they try to interpret why the Norseman is delivering a pizza to the Englishman. To them, with a more racially centralized perspective, they don't see two plain characters in a movie, they see a symbolic act between two races. But from an American perspective we don't even really notice because in life that is how it is for us.

I remember censorship was very harsh for a long time way back when I was a young boy. In recent years it has let up some (because of the internet) but these past two years I've noticed a real sharp upturn in standards on the big screen and in the music.

The truth is that we need all levels of this "soul food" we call entertainment. The raunchy, the dangerous, the high brow, the classic, the erotic and so on and so forth.

I think, coming out of this last 6 years or so of tough economy and drastic changes in America that Europe and America are much closer than before and the internet has been a huge part of that. (especially Twitter and Facebook)

So, to sum up this general chatter I would like to ask you what you prefer to see in your entertainment and your thoughts on the porn industry and in what way should censorship be handled if you don't agree with how things are done right now.

I would also like to add that censorship isn't restricted to entertainers and the entertainment industry, it reaches all parts of media, even this message board. See this thread on the funding of this board and the way censorship has affected it in regards to the partnerships and funders of ATS.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I personally don't believe in censorship. responsible adults should be able to make up their own minds about what they watch

however, there needs to be clear warnings for content.

some prude in an office should not get to decide for everyone what is right and wrong.

a reply to: Asynchrony

Censorship is the deliberate suppression of one person's self-expression by another for the perceived benefit of a third-party. In other words, it's an attempt at forcing people to conform to an ideology. It's also utterly pointless, pragmatically speaking, since words have no inherent meaning. You can ban a word but it's meaning can simply be attached to a new word or substituted by a word from a foreign language. That concept is the reason we have a multitude of languages on this planet and was the basis for Orwell's 'newspeak'.

For every so-called curse word there is at least one synonym that is considered acceptable by the very same culture. In most cases though, these words have no more meaning than the likes of 'eek', 'wow', or 'yikes'. If there's nothing wrong with the meaning of the word, why then is a particular sequence of symbols so deplorable?

Wait, let me rephrase that...

Frelling dren, what the yotz are those fahrbot hazmots thinking?!

Curse words are used as insults to attack the emotional well being of the recipient. They are considered lewd, low-brow, insulting, and in the general term, unbecoming of people of noble character. Even with those who are not "nobles", the middle class or even many people of the low class, to curse makes one very unattractive as it shows a lack of self-restraint and childness not desirable.

originally posted by: CretumOrbis
a reply to: Asynchrony

Censorship is the deliberate suppression of one person's self-expression by another for the perceived benefit of a third-party. In other words, it's an attempt at forcing people to conform to an ideology. It's also utterly pointless, pragmatically speaking, since words have no inherent meaning. You can ban a word but it's meaning can simply be attached to a new word or substituted by a word from a foreign language. That concept is the reason we have a multitude of languages on this planet and was the basis for Orwell's 'newspeak'.

For every so-called curse word there is at least one synonym that is considered acceptable by the very same culture. In most cases though, these words have no more meaning than the likes of 'eek', 'wow', or 'yikes'. If there's nothing wrong with the meaning of the word, why then is a particular sequence of symbols so deplorable?

Wait, let me rephrase that...

Frelling dren, what the yotz are those fahrbot hazmots thinking?!

I agree that censors are needed to filter out the really raunchy stuff, but, to make everything squeaky-clean and goody-two-shoes is really not cool.

originally posted by: okamitengu
I personally don't believe in censorship. responsible adults should be able to make up their own minds about what they watch

however, there needs to be clear warnings for content.

some prude in an office should not get to decide for everyone what is right and wrong.

a reply to: Asynchrony

Thanks for emphasizing my point. What you just described is an ideology. If it's purely about being insulted, again, the words themselves have no relevance - only the manner in which they're used. You may find cursing to be unattractive or repulsive but some may feel the exact opposite, myself included. I find the very notion of nobility, or class structure in general, to be revolting. Your opinion of what is 'high-class' or 'low-brow' is just that, an opinion, and is no more relevant than the opinion of any other human on this planet. If you don't like it, don't look. I don't have the right to force you to look, nor should anyone have the right to force someone to refrain from it either.

Censorship is to fascism as algebra is to mathematics. That, in a nutshell, is the point Orwell was trying to make with his concept of newspeak. Censorship in any form for any reason should be just as revolting and unacceptable as any other form of fascism.

True that class depictions are dismal at best but there is division beyond wealth between the classes that extends to intelligence, education, language of course and more. Nobility can be confusing to understand in modern times but I personally find nothing revolting about it. Cursing isn't always unattractive and repulsive in my personal views of how language can be used, I was giving a general overview from a non-personal standpoint. Censorship, however, is required unless of course your society has no underlying relations with other countries or an economy and so forth at the base of your infrastructure.

originally posted by: CretumOrbis
a reply to: Asynchrony

Thanks for emphasizing my point. What you just described is an ideology. If it's purely about being insulted, again, the words themselves have no relevance - only the manner in which they're used. You may find cursing to be unattractive or repulsive but some may feel the exact opposite, myself included. I find the very notion of nobility, or class structure in general, to be revolting. Your opinion of what is 'high-class' or 'low-brow' is just that, an opinion, and is no more relevant than the opinion of any other human on this planet. If you don't like it, don't look. I don't have the right to force you to look, nor should anyone have the right to force someone to refrain from it either.

Censorship is to fascism as algebra is to mathematics. That, in a nutshell, is the point Orwell was trying to make with his concept of newspeak. Censorship in any form for any reason should be just as revolting and unacceptable as any other form of fascism.