Consider the merits and demerits of censorship and state your reasons why you think it is un/necessary.

In our society, there is certain sensitivity towards certain issues like religion and politics. You can get yourself into a lot of trouble if you should be careless in the way you speak about these issues. Therefore, most of us choose to avoid them, thus resulting in the existence of what we call, social taboos. Social taboos include pornography, racial differences and violence.

Censorship came about as a mean to protect everyone’s best interest, and to ensure national security. With censorship, anything that is a potential threat to national security is considered unsuitable or offensive for viewing, and will be removed before releasing the film or book, etc, to the public.

On one hand, censorship is somewhat necessary. First off, there are groups of people who need to be sheltered from the truth, namely children and the weak-minded. Children require the protection because of their innocent nature. Knowing too much might do them more harm than good if they are unable to handle the information. They deserve the chance to live in a fairytale-like world while they grow up. The weak-minded need protection as well because they might go about facing these issues with the wrong approach.

In addition, censorship protects the well-being of people. People might re-enact what they see or read. “Monkey see, monkey do”, right? What would happen if a child decided to get violent with his peers after watching a very gory film? People are going to get hurt, unnecessarily.

Most importantly, like what I have mentioned in the beginning, censorship helps to maintain peace and social stability. If sensitive issues are brought up in an offensive manner, certain groups of people might be enraged, causing our national security to be threatened. Then all hell will break lose. Riots and violent acts might occur, resulting in bloodshed.

However, there are always two sides to a coin. Censorship can be unnecessary as well. To rebut the point on protecting children from the truth, censorship would only delay education. Children will grow up to be naïve. Ultimately, this will only lead to them becoming one of the weak-minded.

Furthermore, censorship shields people from reality. The down side of that is that people will become unaware of what is really happening around them. You become ignorant about important issues.

Moreover, you become simple-minded. Since you were shield from reality, you are at a lost when you finally face these issues later on in life, not being able to think critically. Your mentality of the world is child-like, and your level of maturity will be pathetic.

I personally feel that censorship might not be that necessary. There are other more mature ways of dealing with sensitive issues, like through explanations. Expose and then educate people on these issues instead of avoiding them. That way, people are aware of things happening around them, and understand how to go about dealing with these social taboos in a mature and careful manner. The way I see it, that would be a win-win situation. People get to know about reality, yet national security can still be protected.

How does the media and its subjective perception affect the way this incident was handled?

I refer to the article entitled “Singapore swimmers in hot water” (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/268154/1/.html).
The media is a medium that is used to pass information to people. However, exactly how accurate is a piece of information released by the media? As far as I know, the media is a powerful tool, but also a powerfully scary one. It can meddle with our emotions and views, simply just by restricting what we know, and making us believe what they want us to believe.

Addressing the issue, the reporter who snapped a shot of the young Singaporean swimmers smiling during the disqualification of the American team obviously wanted to get these swimmers in trouble, and succeeded in doing so. When people see that picture of the Singaporean swimmers smiling, they believe whatever is reported. After all, “Seeing is believing”, right? Most people wouldn’t consider the hidden agenda behind it. That was how matters blew up.

People became furious with the Singaporean swimmers, and naturally, ill feelings were harbored towards the country, Singapore, as a whole. The matter seemed personal, making it look like the Singaporeans had no respect for their fellow sportsmen as they were mocking them. That was why the Singapore authorities had to step in the clear up this matter. It wasn’t just about the 2 Singaporean swimmers anymore as the reputation of Singapore was at stake. Therefore, Singapore had to face the hassle of arguing that false accusations were made against their swimmers. Powerful people in big organizations like the Singapore Sports Council and Singapore Swimming Association had to step in to clear up this misunderstanding.

If it weren’t for the media and its subjective perception, the matter would not have escalated to such a point. If you think about it, the matter was nothing worth reporting about. The shot of the reactions of the 2 swimmers just happened to portray their emotions wrongly, and the media used that to play with our perception. Therefore, a mountain was made out of a molehill, and this affected the way the incident was handled.