Discuss this issue with other Syvum members in this forum.  Feel free to
   post your own points or your essays here for the benefit of others, or to
   receive feedback.

Posted at: Wed Mar 10 03:47:37 2004 (GMT)

   Hey, I thought the points u guys put up were excellent..seems a useful way
   to prepare for the AWA part.

Posted at: Thu Mar 18 07:34:08 2004 (GMT)

   I think the point made about cencorship being a propaganda tool is
   excellent...I've  experienced it first hand...The government (Zim...) in my
   part of the world clamps down on any one trying to speak out against it...

Posted at: Thu Mar 18 07:39:13 2004 (GMT)

   Human beings are generally perceptible to their five senses, of which larger
   consitutes the eyes.Most of us try to imitate what is shown on
   television.And if violence is shown as an daredevil act and in an
   encouraging way,we perceive it as an essential part of  our life and try to
   adopt.There certainly should be a  body which regulates the violence and
   obscenities in television so that it should not carry the audience blindly
   towards them.

Posted at: Sun Dec 12 07:41:02 2004 (GMT)

   > Hey, I thought the points u guys put up were excellent..seems a useful way
   
   > to prepare for the AWA part.

Posted at: Fri Feb 11 14:36:49 2005 (GMT)

   "Seeing is believing", this is what humans are mostly affected from. We
   normally tend to believe what we see, so it is of prime importance to keep a
   check on what society sees and hence believes. If contents that are inhuman
   are openly visible to all then it is likely to cause damage to the society
   as some people might take it otherwise. As it is also said that "Think no
   evil,Hear no evil and Look no evil" in order to be a better humanbeing. So
   obscene things must be restricted using censorship. 

Posted at: Wed Apr 6 10:40:00 2005 (GMT)

   In my opinion, governments or other organizations should not be given the
   responsibility to censor broadcast programs for content. What a person
   watches or listens to should be solely his or her personal choice. Moreover,
   what might be offensive to some, might not be so to others. Therefore, if a
   central organization is given the power to decide what the audience of a
   nation should or should not watch or listen to, it might create a divide
   between the people of the nation that are offended by such content and the
   people that are not.
   
   Having said that, I would like to mention that if the choice of
   appropriateness is given to the consumer, it brings with it an additional
   responsibility of ensuring that children under the age of 17 do not have
   access to such content. This can be achieved by broadcast network people
   categorizing content that is potentially offensive as "R". Today's
   technology allows people to restrict access to such programs at the click of
   a button. This ensures that unintentional access to inappropriate media
   content is restricted.
   
   A word on the misuse of censoring powers bestowed upon a governmental
   organization is in order here. In country X, where the ruling government had
   the rights to censor content broadcast over its media, it misused the same
   power to censor certain programs that were created to uncover certain
   illegal activities that were going on within the governmental engine. This
   shows that such powers can be misused to suit the governments own vested
   interests.
   
   In conclusion,it is against democracy to force a certain behavior on a
   nation. Freedom of speech is the flagstone of democracy and should be upheld
   by all democratic nations at any cost.  

Posted at: Sat Mar 11 18:39:42 2006 (GMT)

   Hi All,
	  The Government should impose	restrictions as stated in the Points
   which we have seen before.In my view there can be some situations where a
   Government itself can misuse the media for it's own benefit,In that case the
   Honorable Judiciary Should put some members or council  who should take
   decision  to provide rights or not for showing that content to the People. 
	     Each and Evey country's culture varies so it is a must that
   censorship is required ,otherwise some advertisements itself can cause a
   communal violence or so.

Posted at: Mon Aug 7 11:18:19 2006 (GMT)

   Accoring to me Censorship of offensive content, language and behaviour by a
   regulating body is perhaps necessary. I would like to present my view not by
   a mere statement but rather by an analogy. In a democratic form of
   government one might argue that the freedom of speech is the fundamental
   right to any person. Well i would say that  this statement might be
   theoritically correct but practically it is not. Consider a classroom full
   of children. Do we expect them to be quiet in the absence of a teacher. I
   guess not; but yes when a teacher enters the classroom he/she brings a
   necessary amount of discipline in the class which is infact enjoyed by all.
   One might say that the comparison between a child and an adult is
   fundamentally flawed, but to this my answer would be that when we look into
   the real picture we find that the very subject that we are talking about
   i.e. obscene behaviour and language is much more prevalent among adults than
   it is among children.
   Hence it do calls for a necessary governing body which maintains proper
   discipline among people.
   But, over here i would also like to mention that the regulatory body should
   be wise enough not to subside others' thoughts for some self interests. 
   Hence with a proper choice of a regulating body we can see a better place to
   live.

Posted at: Tue Aug 22 00:33:29 2006 (GMT)

   Accoring to me Censorship of offensive content, language and behaviour by a
   regulating body is perhaps necessary. I would like to present my view not by
   a mere statement but rather by an analogy. In a democratic form of
   government one might argue that the freedom of speech is the fundamental
   right to any person. Well i would say that  this statement might be
   theoritically correct but practically it is not. Consider a classroom full
   of children. Do we expect them to be quiet in the absence of a teacher. I
   guess not; but yes when a teacher enters the classroom he/she brings a
   necessary amount of discipline in the class which is infact enjoyed by all.
   One might say that the comparison between a child and an adult is
   fundamentally flawed, but to this my answer would be that when we look into
   the real picture we find that the very subject that we are talking about
   i.e. obscene behaviour and language is much more prevalent among adults than
   it is among children.
   Hence it do calls for a necessary governing body which maintains proper
   discipline among people.
   But, over here i would also like to mention that the regulatory body should
   be wise enough not to subside others' thoughts for some self interests. 
   Hence with a proper choice of a regulating body we can see a better place to
   live.

Posted at: Tue Aug 22 00:34:11 2006 (GMT)

   
   The	amount and definition of improper content and language depends on the
   cultural aspects of a country.For example,kissing and hugging in open may
   not be improper in United States but the same is objectionable in countries
   like India.Furthurmore,more conservative countries like Iran or Afghanistan
   may have, and they do have in fact,more stringent definition of the
   impropriety of a content and its amount whch could be catered to public by
   media.Thus, the amount and degree of sensorship should be decided by
   government or some other competent body having proper madate for doing
   so.Let me present some argument in the favour of my above stated posiotion.
   
   First and foremost there should be a body to decide the amount and type of
   improper content which coild be places in public domain.Because children are
   most affected by this.They pick up wroung things quite easily.For
   example,high school children imitating Hollywood actors to intimidate and
   shoot at their colleagues.
   
   Secondly, in countries like india where strong social system exists and
   social values are more important than personal freedom,vulgar laanguage and
   obscenities create uneasiness.Here prudent control of the public content
   becomes very important.
   
   Thirdly, in some religions, like Islam, rules are laid down for public
   behaviour and morality.Here the contents accepted in other countries may be
   regarded as blasfamous.
   
   Apparently we need country specific regulation/sensorship of television and
   radio content is of seminal importance.  

Posted at: Tue Mar 6 02:22:03 2007 (GMT)

   Radio and television are medium which brings this world together.  We can
   hear and see what is happening around the world where ever we are.  It is
   the something that has brought  a difference around as we come to know of
   new places, people, habits and lots of different things.
   
   But as we all come to know of different people, there habits, and religion
   we have to respect it.  What one of us feels is good is not the same for
   others.  Like kissing, hugging scenes are accepted in united states and most
   of the western countries.  Those are deamed improper by countries like
   india, pakistan and most of the asian countries.
   
   There are strong sentiments about it and it is taken as something against
   the society and culture they represent.
   
   It always need not be different countries, in same country as in India which
   is made of different religion and culture it is always not acceptable.  Like
   in state of Goa it is not an issue to wear a bikini to the beach, but if you
   go to states like Maharashtra and Kerala there it is deemed indecent and
   inappropriate.
   
   We live with the society that makes us and that also has certain rules and
   the rules depend on where one live.	Like what is accepted as appropriate in
   countries like India might also not be appropriate in countries like Saudi
   Arabia because there it is defined by what is rules laid in the Korean.
   
   These all show only one thing that censorship should be governed for radio
   and television as everywhere it cannot be said the same thing would not hurt
   the sentiments of the people living in that country or place.
   
   It is best that each place has its own censorship rules and regulations for
   radio and television. 

Posted at: Mon Mar 26 22:32:19 2007 (GMT)

   HERE'S MY POST
   I totally agree with the notion that government should act as a filter to
   the media  generated reports and programmes and censor the content it deemed
   unfit for the commmon people and could harm the atmosphere of the nation.
   Also,it is true that different countries have different people with various
   cultures,societies and values which they had imbibed over a long period of
   time from their ancestors and what is deemed correct for one culture may not
   be fit for the other,and hence should be the level of censoreship.
   For ex. if we talk about india,the culture here is totally different from
   that of the west .In india ,still today there is a culture of joint
   families,young people rever their elders like god and don't hesitate to show
   that publically.
   As such,the way of greeting each other is so different,in INDIA males greet
   each other by shaking hands,and  the other sex by wishing some words, their
   elders by touching their feet and in west  kissing the other sex while
   greeting is a common practice but in our country it is still a far cry.
   Remember the latest episode of the hollywood great Mr. RICHARED GERE kissing
   bollywood actor SHILPA SHETTY in front of such a large crowd at an AIDS
   AWARENESS PROGRAMME'and how the news was shown on every channel through-out
   the day causing so much demonstrations and protests throughout the
   country.Had the news been sensored at the first place it wouldn't have
   caused so bedlam,and that's where the role of government sensorship becomes
   important.
   It should also be remembered that the act done by Mr.RICHARD GERE is NORMAL
   as far as HIS culure is concerned but for us it is undigestible stuff as our
   culture doesn't permit us for such thing.

Posted at: Sun May 27 15:18:18 2007 (GMT)

   Argument Topic is:
   When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more
   profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company
   should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a
   single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by
   cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all
   employees
   
   
   Analysis:
   The Apogee Company wants to centralize its field offices. They found that
   the profit of the company was more than today. The company feels that by
   doing so , the cost can be reduced along with that the employees can be
   supervised in a better way. The argument is flawed and, hence, not
   persuasive.
   
   Firstly, the turnover or the number of employees working in the Apogee
   company is not given. It is very important factor to decide the number of
   field offices to be mentioned. If there are thousands of employees at one
   location then it is good idea to have field offices at different locations.
   This will help in a better way to manage the employees locally at each
   office location. Also by doing so, the local clients at each field office
   location can be serviced in a better way by these employees.
   However,for example, if there are only some 10 employees working at each
   location then it is not good idea to maintain such field offices, as this
   will involve frequent travelling of manager to supervise employees, also
   co-coordinating with the management staff at every location will involve
   bottleneck in the decisions of the organization as whole. 
   
   Secondly, it is not given how the work at different location is
   interdependent. If the work at one location requires approval or subpart
   from other location to proceed their work then the geographical barrier may
   serve as obstacle to the delivery of product on time, because of reasons
   like, distance between the locations or the time zone difference, work
   culture difference etc. However if the final product is not interdependent
   on the different field location, and, can be manufactured at one location to
   be sold to clients then in that case it is good idea to have different field
   locations as by doing so the product can be manufactured and delivered to
   the local/nearby clients soon without involving huge transport cost too.
   
   Thirdly, how the location of field offices was chosen is not given in the
   argument. If the field offices are at manageable distance from the main
   office and also has plenty of clients located nearby then it is good idea to
   have such offices. This will help to serve the clients more efficiently as
   will not involve geographical barrier.
   
   Fourthly, it is not given how all field offices were coordinated. This is
   very deciding factor to the profit of company. If each office has its own
   management levels to manage their office then the monthly or quarterly or
   yearly report can be monitored for the revenue made at each location by main
   office, and, all responsibility can be handed over to local management at
   each location. This will reduce the bottleneck of monitoring the employees
   at different locations.
   
   Fifthly, how the work distribution among the offices was done is also not
   given in the argument. If the work is distributed to very distant offices
   then that may affect the profit of the company, as it involves the culture
   difference, time zone difference and hence the quality and time line of the
   product. Whether to centralize or distribute work also partially depend on
   product of the company too. For example in case of IT company the product is
   in electronic format which can be delivered via Internet too. So it is good
   to have centralized office too.
   
   
   In sum, it cannot be decided whether all the field offices should be closed
   and the company should be made centralized unless the factors like turnover,
   number of employees at each field location, the criteria for the field
   office locations, work co-ordination are analyzed. 

Posted at: Thu Jan 10 19:09:50 2008 (GMT)

   please review this give your honest feedback, my first try 
   
   
   Language and signs are form of communication channels; by which human being
   communicate their needs, ideas, concepts and understanding to each other
   that makes them to stay together. During progressive development of
   communication, we learn to develop and adopt the signs and languages to
   express emotion, sentiments, frustration and anger. The offensive languages
   and behavior are the expression of anger, frustration and cruelty which
   always creates a destructive and negative environment. 
   
   Television and radio are the medium to communicate to large audience to any
   part of the world. Hence communicating something on those medium has a
   greater impact than any other media. Flashing out some offensive languages
   and behavior using such media can spread to vast audience creating a
   destructive and revolution environment. In my point of view broadcasting
   offensive languages and behavior should be avoided or censored by governing
   authority any governing body authorizes to do so; it is always good for any
   society. 
   
   Now a days Television and Radio are widely used by teenagers and grown up
   child as a medium of entertainment and information. Hence broadcasting those
   negative signs through this medium can make the teenagers to learn those bad
   things and use that in future, hence creating a complete chaotic and non
   disciplinary society. 
   
   In Many countries, now days each and every program that been shown on
   Television or broadcasted in radio has to undergo a review for any such type
   of offensive material. I strongly support the countries do so, and those
   countries not doing so, should adopt a censorship policy. The censor review
   team should evaluate the degree of offensiveness or vulgar behavior involved
   and carry out an unbiased judgment not to display or broadcast any negative
   languages or sign that creates a non disciplinary society. In doing so, I
   strongly believe we can create a peaceful and progressive society all
   together.

Posted at: Tue Jan 15 08:34:06 2008 (GMT)

   Television and radio are a very good source of information and entertainment
   all over the world. The programs aired on TV and radio is easily accessible
   to and watched/heard by all age groups and communities. Besides giving
   knowledge and entertainment, if aired unchecked, it has a potential to have
   adverse effect on society, leading to deterioration of moral values. In my
   view, censorship is required to an extent to prevent degradation of society
   and protect younger generation.
   
   The innocent minds of children are most vulnerable to questionable scenes,
   offensive language and violence. When they see or hear such things they try
   to copy such things, believing this as a normal behavior. One may question
   that child lock facilities are available to protect children from such
   things but one cannot assume that every parent uses this and every TV has
   this facility. So, objectionable portions of these programs need filtration.
   
   
   Apart from children, when grown people are subjected to objectionable and
   violent programs repeatedly, these things can gradually become social norm.
   
   Also some programs may hurt sentiments of a particular community or gender.
   This may lead to friction in society. So, control of these things should be
   taken care of by government to maintain peace and harmony in society.
   
   One may say that censorship puts a question mark on our right to freedom of
   speech and express our own ideas. But when there is a right there is a duty
   also. Betterment of our society and good social values is responsibility of
   all. But at the same time, censorship should not be used by government in
   its vested interest. Censorship should not check public opinion being
   expressed.
   
   To conclude, I will say that there is a need of censorship of TV and radio
   programs by an impartial, responsible and sensible organization. Also there
   should be some guidelines on which this organization should work.

Posted at: Sat Feb 16 10:16:40 2008 (GMT)

   >the issue persented above is government offical should be allowed to censor
   the radio and t.v programs is interesting one. According to me,on one
   hand,Censorship of offensive content, language and behavior by radio and
   television programs should be necessary.on the other hand, its role should
   be limited.I would like to present my view with personal observations and
   some times personal experiences.  
    
	Radio and T.V programs are now-a-days part of life in society.people
   learn most of the things from entertainment media. if such media uses a
   offensive language then people use to learn it.the media should be a thing
   to teach ethics   along with entertainment.Grade3 student,for example, speak
   lengthy dialogs,songs by observing from entertainment media once or
   twice.when the same is teched by a teacher the student cannot get
   immediately.media has that much influence on people.so programs conducted in
   the radio and television are to be censored to prevent the society from one
   of the adverse effects of media.government need to take responsibility.
	  Any country is united of different nations, religions and cultures.
   if a program is criticize one culture or one religion, then there will be
   rival between one and other religions people.in my experience, when i was in
   10+2, a television  conducted a program " whose religion is great". that
   debate leads to storm in the society and there were approximately 250 people
   died in the war between the two religions.so media should be controlled by
   government or higher bodies to prevent such piece in the society.
     the role of government in censorship is to be justifiable. in my
   opinion,regulatory authorities should not attack the freedom of the media to
   bring out the facts ,that have to reach by the common people, like scam by
   government officials and adverse government policies effect the people.when
   the government and higher authorities conduct the censorship perfectly we
   can see a better world ever we seen.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   >

Posted at: Thu Mar 6 20:31:52 2008 (GMT)

   
   ur essay is very good nice. if it is ur first attempt, u r brillient. u have
   good presentation than knowledge
   we neeeeed .that quality.keep it up/

Posted at: Thu Mar 6 20:46:52 2008 (GMT)

   Each country has its own culture and beliefs and one act which is generally
   accepted in one country may be offensive in another country. Therefore, the
   need for different censorship rules in different countries arises.
   
   Taking example of kissing by a couple, its common in USA or UK but if it is
   done in open public area in Egypt, the couple can be sent to jail for 30
   days. This gives us the idea of thinkings & beliefs by Egyptians as against
   that of American or English people. And, therefore telecast also has to be
   made accordingly and which needs to be censored on different rules in
   different countries.
   
   However, different censorship rules in different countries doesn't change
   the meaning of humaninity. Internatianally, everybody & everything should be
   treated equally except for difference in culture.

Posted at: Fri Mar 21 10:15:01 2008 (GMT)

   Each country has its own culture and beliefs and one act which is generally
   accepted in one country may be offensive in another country. Therefore, the
   need for different censorship rules in different countries arises.
   
   Taking example of kissing by a couple, its common in USA or UK but if it is
   done in open public area in Egypt, the couple can be sent to jail for 30
   days. This gives us the idea of thinkings & beliefs by Egyptians as against
   that of American or English people. And, therefore telecast also has to be
   made accordingly and which needs to be censored on different rules in
   different countries.
   
   However, different censorship rules in different countries doesn't change
   the meaning of humaninity. Internatianally, everybody & everything should be
   treated equally except for difference in culture.

Posted at: Fri Mar 21 10:15:06 2008 (GMT)