Do we need a Censor Board?
The Central Board of Film Certification (aka the Censor Board) decides, among other things, what content finally goes on screens at theatres. As per their website, they justify censorship by saying "Film censorship becomes necessary because a film motivates thought and action and assures a high degree of attention and retention as compared to the printed word. The combination of act and speech, sight and sound in semi darkness of the theatre with elimination of all distracting ideas will have a strong impact on the minds of the viewers and can affect emotions. Therefore, it has as much potential for evil as it has for good and has an equal potential to instil or cultivate violent or good behaviour. It cannot be equated with other modes of communication. Censorship by prior restraint is, therefore, not only desirable but also necessary"
Many a times controversies are created because of the content they censor. Just recently, David Fincher, the director of 'The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo' said he will refuse to release the movie in India because of the proposed cuts (which if you've read the books, you know form a major portion of the background of the protagonist).
I don't feel that we need someone to decided what we watch. Audiences today are mature enough to formulate their own thoughts based on what they see. At the end of the day, most of this content is available online anyway and is easily accessible.
What do you feel?
Questions - answer/ idea
About the Author
I think Gandhiji put it best when he said "Be the change you want to see in the world."
Unless each of us does his/her part, we can't expect change to happen.
Other debates by the author
-
Test your awareness with 5 new questions every week worth 25 points!!
Questions most debated/ most recent
-
Makepeace_Sitlhou -
Makepeace_Sitlhou
-
nikhlesh -
nikhlesh
-
aksaklani
-
jeetalex -
Strider -
NewtonLewis
-
nikhlesh
-
NewtonLewis
What surprises me is the fact that, even with the presence of the censor board, how come so much of violence is telecast and so much of indecency is broadcast.
Perhaps the Board is taking into consideration the changing ideas in society and sums up what people would like to see, and according allows through what would be "acceptable".
At the same time just crushing the idea of censorship would defeat the purpose of having traditions, norms and values. What does the country stand for - what is our identity as distinct from the rest of the world?
Just as families have certain values - similarly society as a whole has certain values which one would like to see - being carried into the future.
Those values which are nearest to truth and compassion would be like Godly qualities and would sustain the society in trying times. A complete breakaway and absence of norms, values and traditions would leave the 'family' and the 'country' at SEA WITHOUT EVEN A BOAT!
freedom to express our thought-process is of paramount importance.we strongly wish that all kinds of censorship is avoided and we come out with our feelings freely.but the problem is mainly with the mass media.there must be a greater display of responsibility by cinema and t v and they must resort to self-censorship.but, can we reach that stage and make the media more answerable?various news channels have sprouted up in the vernacular languages and they are adding to the existing difficult situation.can they improve upon their credibility?
I think movies (fiction) are a lot different than news (non-fiction, for the most part) when it comes to the idea of freedom of expression. With respect to the news media too, there are 2 sets of views - firstly, the views presented by the channel (or newspaper) in question and secondly, views expressed by guests/speakers on the channel. The channel should be held accountable for the views expressed by it's anchors and journalists (which is why the NBA exists in India), but they can't technically be held responsible for the views expressed by guests in a live debate. The only problem with associations like the NBA is that the action against the channels is only taken at a later date, which can lead to problems to be caused before that. Movies on the other hand, are mostly fiction, and therefore the writer/director should have the freedom to express his views accordingly.
i agree with strider. what we need is a rating board, not a censor board. i've always found it pathetic that someone else will choose what i do or do not see.
and i thought we believed in freedom here.
not saying everyone should watch everything, but there should at least be a choice. if a film has adult content, we can choose to watch it or not watch it. don't take away the filmmakers creative license, at least.
Nicely summed up, Dhruv. I think that both Strider and you have made a great argument - what we need is a Ratings board. We are not looking at getting rid of the entire idea completely, just limiting what the Board can or cannot do. Each adult among us (well each one of us hope) should have the power to decide for himself/herself what content we want to watch, and what we want to skip. All we're asking for is the chance to make that choice!
I think we should just have a 'Rating Board' and not a censor board. Cutting out parts from someone's movie defeats the purpose and disturbs the vision of the film-maker. I think we understand the existence of 'adult' material in an 'A' rated movie, and then it should be my choice if i want to see a bloody/sex-filled/violent movie.
Well put. Totally agree with you. Now, we only have to convince the ministry about this :s
Good question. No easy answer. Would ideally like no censor board with scissors but ours is a country full of heretics and extremists, more vulnerable to political plays. They're just looking for excuses.
But should the actions of these heretics and extremists hold the entire country at ransom? If we have to appease every one of these groups, we may end up with nothing to read or watch.
Yes we need a Board for films, but not censor board. It should just gives ratings and only intervene if something is really disturbing or wrong. Like portraying a real life with wrong facts.