Democratic withhold a principle of “freedom of speech” which they take pride in.
In some parts of the world the government controls the media. This stops anything considered “harmful,” “immoral,” or anything that could threaten the country’s “stability,” from being published and/or broadcast. Even when freedom of speech exists, media is constrained by those who provide the money which enables programmes and publications to exist.
A news organisation’s content reflects the ethos and ideology of its owners.
Advertisers do influence the content- the advertisers will cancel their accounts if they consider the content to undermine the messages about the products they are selling.
While press and broadcasting is considered “free” in the UK, there are external constrains in place on the media. There are regulations that they have to abide by, like the OFCOM Communications Act 2003, and the BBC’s Royal Charter obligations.
The Home Office in the United Kingdom has complete control over all of the broadcasting content, without referring to Parliament.
There are other legislation in place, including the Official Secrets Act, the Prevention of Terrorism Act, Contempt of Court Act, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, and others that relate to libel, race relations, obscenity, sedition, and incitement to disaffection and treason. Direct government censorship still does occur.
The presentation on Media Censorship was useful as I found out that the media is primarily controlled by the Home Office, and not Parliament. Media Censorship is a law on the press in Britain which restricts the publication of anything that can be taken in a way that offends someone, is immoral, or is considered harmful to the country’s stability, which is explained above. This presentation was really enlightening as it informed me in great detail how the business is controlled and how items are chosen and decided if they are suitable enough for the public to see and/or read.