Should journalism be kept out of the premises of censorship?

Journalism should be kept in the premises of censorship because there are few incidents which should not be revealed. For example: If a girl gets molested and if the journalist's highlight the news with her photograph and that's the end of her life.

These Journalist are going to worse in the last few years and they are trying to expose some unwanted issues to the public. so my point of view is that they should also be in the premises of censorship

Let us consider the case of Common Wealth Games. These journalists bought a good news about corruption however they fail to think that they are spitting on themselves. Does anyone know what the feedback made by BBC on the news about common wealth games issue? People of India are the only one who can comment on their own works

In a democratic country, freedom of expression is of paramount importance. A journalist cannot do justice to his job if he is unduly obstructed from writing his views freely and without fear. A journalist ought to be free, fair, frank, fearless. Censor will cripple journalism.

The only restriction on journalist can be with regard to matter of national security. To ensure security of nation, censorship is not necessary. The judicial system is there to check it. If any individual is offended, he may move court for damages for contempt. The leakage of secure govt or defence information will lead to action under official Secret Act and the officers leaking information will be considered more guilty than the journalist. similarly, an aggrieved person may bring suit for damages in respect of any defamation. Hence, censor is not required.

It will suffice that a code of conduct for journalists is made applicable. The journalist will take this code of conduct in consideration. Any action by Journalist Guild or body will be taken if specific case is brought to notice.

Very interesting topic and is quiet suitable in present scenorio.
"Should journalism be kept out of the premises of censorship?"

Well i first want to say NO and then YeS..which means that neutrality is to be maintained depending on the sensitivity of the news they are publishing or broadcasting..

I agree with Deivigan that Journalist are making fun of themselves by concentrating on unncessary things inorder to bring some scams,corruptions etc..Though these are illegal things and need solutions the way they present the facts helps other culprits to escape easily.

There are many such examples where crimes are committed too base on the information provided by media and jounalist.So depending on situation and sensitivity of a journalist or media should need decide cencorship... :)

I also agree with @ Gulshan
"In a democratic country, freedom of expression is of paramount importance. A journalist cannot do justice to his job if he is unduly obstructed from writing his views freely and without fear. A journalist ought to be free, fair, frank, fearless. Censor will cripple journalism"

and due to the right of expression involved in the profession they should act accordingly and wisely instead of bring exposing confidential information which can only damage the society.

If we consider the Mumbai blast, media is the main cause for killing innocent people due to their uncensored clips shown on TV..which allowed the terrorist to know upto date information on the moves taken by security persons..It is very pity that at that time no one even thought that how dangerous it is..The media and journalist just expressed their freedom of expression.. :S :(

In order to add few points to Rajani after the rescue operation there was a big issue regarding their dress that they were not bullet proof and a bullet went past their suit and these journalists took advantage of this issue.

I know how important the issue is however at the same time you are giving some tips to our enemies regarding our defense issues and it should have not been telecast and there is a rule that any military issues should not be telecast and it should be dealt under the wraps.

Come on guys just think whether are we able to hear any military issues regarding America, Russia or even china. Only in India we hear all issues which should not be dealt in public.

A key Wikileaks document which should have resulted in stories calling into question the tactics used by USA against many countries itself makes journalism be not kept out of the premises of censorship as what we get is real picture by journalism

internet regulation should be kept to a minimum,“but the premise is simple: In addition to infringing human rights, ... “We should not labor under the illusion that censorship is some sort of competitive advantage as is proven by wikileaks

Even as some journalists risk their lives to uncover corruption and other stories to serve the public, others in their profession like wikileak ,jouranlist swooping in lives of filmstars is darkside should such coverage for trp is unjustifiable

it's true there was some great journalism committed. But there were costs: When the business model started to implode in competition for profit as aim & we see darkside of journalist

It has been rightly stated in some posts in the thread that many journalists are acting irresponsibly. There are black sheep in any profession. It is for the profession to evolve an internal mechanism and curb any unhealthy practice. There should be clear cut professional ethics guidelines. I feel that many journalist follow ethical practice. It has been state in a post that if a journalist publishes a news item of molestation with girl's photo and identity, she will be put to harm. I agree with this apprehension. However, i have noticed that the local dailies at Agra exercise utmost care and they give fake names of affected individuals and state that the name is changed to hide actual identity.

as we can get genuine news when investigative journalism can have its good side as well. It's not always yellow journalism for the sake of selling newspapers.we can say that is not politics; that is journalism So that is the good side. But do not ask me to forget about the almost joyous fanning or viewership people gave this channel.
also ,a good-quality bloggers should be given a status of journalist as he is looking for opportunity to display his talent & not to participate in rat race

Friends,
The topic is a burning one and I think there is occations of censorship as well as occations of non censorship.

During the Iraque war the journalists were taken through the spots determined previously by the US administration.None of the journalists knew that they are taken wrongly.So the news came out was censored already even without knowledge of journalist who reported it.But Salam Pack's blog revealed all the things to the world and that censorship less news opened the eyes of world.

Why Wikileaks is famous now? Answer is simple.They came with some news which were kept away from journalists.That is the censorship of authority itself.

But in some occations censorship is must and is followed in most cases.The rape cases should not be elaborated as it will mislead youth.Also the future of the victim will be spoiled as Devigan said earlier.Also I agree with Gulshan that security issues should not be revealed.But journalists for producing exclusive news publishes some imaginary stories along with the original one which is really very dangerous especially in riot cases.So censorship is necessary in such areas.

Abid Areacode wrote:
[quote]Why Wikileaks is famous now? Answer is simple.They came with some news which were kept away from journalists.That is the censorship of authority itself.

But in some occasions censorship is must and is followed in most cases.The rape cases should not be elaborated as it will mislead youth.Also the future of the victim will be spoiled as Devigan said earlier.Also I agree with Gulshan that security issues should not be revealed.But journalists for producing exclusive news publishes some imaginary stories along with the original one which is really very dangerous especially in riot cases.So censorship is necessary in such areas.[/quote]


Freedom of expression is essential in a democratic set up. But this cannot be absolute. But censorship by Government is not remedy. There should be self regulation. When any journalist violates the law repeatedly, the aggrieved party may take legal action. However, censor by Government is not desirable.

Gulshan,
I agree to you.But the recent happenings in India in which the famous journalists like Barkha are also included means they are using their freedom for illegal purposes.So some control should be there on journalists also.

Abid Areacode wrote:
[quote]Gulshan,
I agree to you.But the recent happenings in India in which the famous journalists like Barkha are also included means they are using their freedom for illegal purposes.So some control should be there on journalists also.[/quote]

I agree to control. But this should not be prior censor. A self regulatory body of journalists should be formed for issuing directions, guidelines and disciplining. There should be no need for prior censor. But if any complaint is received by the proposed self regulatory body of journalists, this will be scrutinized and appropriate action taken. The self regulatory body should be managed by journalist themselves. They can hold annual elections. Secondly, legal action in court can be taken against any publication of obscene, vulgar, slanderous article or news.

I will tell you an incident that happened in Singapore. A person gave an open statement about the worst part of the INTERNATIONAL YOUTH OLYMPICS 2010 in his Facebook profile. Guess what happened?

He was arrested the next day and was given some sentence and was given a huge amount of fine.

@ gulshan

Whatever you told are really very nice to follow if misuse of rights is done. But before that the damage done to others due to revealing sensitive information can not be regained and will ruin lives..And we have seen many self regualtory bodies in India which are full of corruption, then how come we expect reliability from this body too.. :huh:

Don't think that i have some issues with journalists so that only this guy is speaking like that.

I really love or like to know what is happening around me however at the same time i don't want to hear some unwanted issues being given a huge preference.

For example: During Mr.Lalit Modi's controversies (i mean the IPL big bash corrupt) these journalists concentrated more on that issues and there are lots of issues to which the attention should have been shown like poverty in UP, kasab's sentence to death and so on.

No. Journalism must be subject to controls and regulations. It cannot be entirely let free. Of course it must have a greater degree of freedom than others but that does not mean that it should have authority over everything.As because there are things called biased coverage, misinterpretation, false propaganda, defamatory allegations and the like, therefore there have to be censorship. Media's role in bringing out the bare truth can never be questioned. But the individuals comprising the media , for this purpose, must be pure as the water of the Ganges which very often is not the case.In other walks of like we have goods and bads and so we have laws.Similarly media has truths and lies and so there must be rules to clip media's wings as and when required.