How Effective Has Censorship Been in Protecting People's Morality?

Censorship has been a controversial and hotly debated issue in many countries. In Singapore, a recent relaxation of censorship laws created a great outcry in many sectors of the public because the first screening of films under the relaxed censorship law was blatant pornography. Many of the more conservative members of the public claimed that such films would degrade the minds of our youth and erode the morality of our country. But how far is this true?

The integral question is whether censorship is effective in protecting human morality. Censorship is defined as the control of the government or other authority over the mass media. Could stringent control of so called crime-inciting films protect morality? The main thought in most societies is that some types of films, namely those depicting violence and sex, have an effect on the human mind. Some people believe that such films act as a catalyst to promote violent and sex-related crime. However. others believe that as free thinkers and beings of superior intelligence, humans do not succumb so easily to themes on television. They believe that if you saw a rape on television, you would not leave the cinema and rape another person. However, this is not always true.

In America there was an outcry against censorship by the government in the 1960s based on the same argument -- that the human mind does not succumb as easily to violence and pornography. They succeeded in getting their government to abolish censorship laws completely. People then felt that they were finally free to express themselves. What happened? In a matter of months, shops appeared everywhere selling hard-core pornography. Shops that were once hidden in back-alleys and out-of-the-way places were now openly selling their wares. More importantly, crime rates since the 1960s went up.

Why did this happen when censorship was relaxed merely to liberalise the arts? When a person indulges in pornography, it does not have an immediate effect on the person. Rather, it desensitises his mind to future pornography. Hence a person starting on soft-core pornography would probably soon require hard-core to satisfy his needs. It is the same with violence. Repeated scenes of a person getting his hand blown off makes the mind less sensitive to such matters in the future. Hence, a code of morals that was once high begins to be reduced until it is no longer in existence, which is probably the case in America. In 1986, a rape in a crowded subway station drew less than a glance from passers-by. Some even stood there motionless and watched. On another occasion, a four-year old girl was brutally raped in broad daylight in an open playground and passing motorists merely moved along without lifting a finger to help. It was only through one person who leapt out of his car to help that the rapist was caught.

Therefore, the people who once thought that violent and sex-based films would not affect our morality are having second thoughts now. The effects of pornography on `mature, thinking' adults have already been discussed, and the effects were not pretty. How much more then, the effects on children? Violence on television abounds in television, from films like Rambo to the seemingly innocent "Tom and Jerry" cartoons. Yes, even the cartoons is a toned-down depiction of violence. The only difference is that no one gets hurt. Children, in their impressionable years, see that, the violence in cartoons lead to no ill side-effects, but that it actually is quite amusing. Thus, with such sadistic thoughts, the children experiment with violence in anticipation of uproarious laughter. In the USA (again), a boy shot his sister after seeing it done on television, however, in this case, with less than amusing results.

Therefore, censorship is important to protect the morals of society. This is especially true in Singapore, with a conservative Asian culture. However, the implementation of censorship may not always be successful. Since censorship is the government ruling on what people are allowed to watch on the screen, it cannot be successful unless there are strict and stringent checks on stores dealing illegally with pornography. If stores are able to smuggle and sell "under the counter" pornography, then it could seem obvious that the government's efforts would be in vain. Censorship restricts the flow of pornography in public, but in the end, it is up to the public to decide for themselves what to do. They have two options. One is to follow the Government's law and watch only approved films. The other is to watch smuggled pornography.

Censorship is only effective if the public wants it to be. It is ultimately up to the public to reinforce the Government's laws and to report the existence of shops dealing in pornographic material. In Singapore, this is hardly the case. The existence of censorship has in fact stimulated the public's curiosity of such subjects. It is only in ignorance of the existence of pornography that censorship can truly be effective. However, Singaporeans are a widely travelled population. After visits to countries with less stringent censorship laws, such as Europe, the United States or even Malaysia, they have become `hooked' on pornography. Sometimes, they even manage to smuggle uncensored tapes in. I know of many people who have at least a few illegal goods in their houses, hidden under mattresses. Thus, the curiosity of the public can undermine the government's efforts to curb pornography.

On the other hand, by restricting the flow of pornography, the government has taken a great step in protecting the morality of the populace. Singaporeans are still Asians and our upbringing has made us extremely naive of matters pertaining to sex. Because of this, many people shy away from pornography and would happily be ignorant of pornography to keep in favour of the law. Because of this, the pornography that is smuggled into the country would probably be done so with great feelings of guilt for the majority of the people. Thus, pornography does not have as huge a detrimental effect on society as it would have been if it were made public. Because of this, people are still sensitive about sex-related crimes, still gasp in horror when someone is blown up on the screen and still shy away from sex. Thus, standards of morality are easily kept high in conservative countries like Singapore.

However, in countries that have an established low censorship standard, the implementation of stricter censorship laws would create a great outcry. Used to the freedom for so long, the people would probably feel that censorship is restricting their freedom and basic human rights to watch pornography. Because pornography has already reared its ugly head and the effects set in, it would be very difficult indeed to implement censorship to remedy the problem.

Therefore, since pornography and films depicting violence have such a detrimental effect on the morality of the people, censorship laws must be implemented to prevent the degradation of human morality. However, censorship must be implemented early to be effective because prolonged exposure to pornography would desensitize the people's minds and lead people to believe that it is not an undesirable thing, hence allowing the degradation of human morality through public pornography.