Read the scenario below, and then argue your stance using the techniques/skills you acquired from A&B chapter 10. You may use your book, your notes, or your handout as reference. Try to appeal to ethos, logos, and pathos, and look for unstated assumptions, etc. For the sake of this exercise, pick one side or the other.
A (non-specific) country is in the middle of a war. Unlike wars in the past, this war is constantly being covered by the media. In order to avoid public panic and protect civilians, the leader of this country banned the publication of images depicting the return of dead soldiers' coffins. Is this protection or censorship?
Emotional Branding
13 years ago
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI feel that this is censorship. The country is censoring what can and can not be shown through the media. I feel that the state of the country government should be taken into consideration. If the country is a democracy then the media has the right to report on anything they want and the government can not intervene. If the government is restricting media like in a communistic government then the government is censoring what is being seen. they are not protecting the country they are only sheltering them from the truth. this is a form of censorship.
ReplyDeleteI think having constant media coverage of a war could make the country's citizens very uneasy. I think banning the publication of these images would be considered protection because the country already has enough to worry about with the war. The country doesn't to be dealing with people in the streets protesting and rioting about bringing the troops home. I think they are also protecting the soldier's families because the families don't want to turn on their T.V. and constantly be reminded about a fallen friend or family member.
ReplyDeleteI think that banning these images is censorship. I understand that many people probably feel like it is protection. People argue that we should not be subjected to the horrifying images of war. But I feel like the government should not have a say in what can and can not be seen. You cant compare this war to wars in the past because every war is different. We don't know how the public is going to react so how can it be looked at as protection? We dont know for a fact that it is going to cause public panic or that it is going to protect civilians. What this is issue really is about is the government trying to take the rights away of the people, not protect us. People have the right to see what is going on in the world, hiding it from people is not protecting anyone. This is why I feel like is is censorship and not protection.
ReplyDeleteThe leader of the country is only protecting the well-being of the citizens. If the citizens constantly see coffins being carried off of a plane or ship, what would they think? I know in our country, it is a sad scene and makes people think that we're losing many soldiers in war when people see coffins being shipped out of a plane with flags covering them. This is a universal feeling when citizens of your own country are dying. It does not say if it is a civil war or not, so it could possibly be censorship also, depending on what side of the war the leader would be leaning on. The protection of the citizens is vital to a war also, which persuades the leader to protect the people by not showing the horrific consequences of going to war. I feel that this is more protecting rather than censorship, simply because the civilians would perhaps panic and breakdown when they see these images. Nobody wants to see soldiers of your own country in coffins, so the leader is obviously protecting their well-being by not showing these images.
ReplyDeleteI believe this is censorship, because the government is trying cover up what actually happens in war. Death in war is almost a guarantee and hiding that from it's citizen I believe is censorship. People have been exposed to wars in the past, and just absolutely hiding the fact that soldiers of (Non-specific) country are be killed is wrong. The general public should be aware of the of the return of dead soldiers, because it puts an impact into people's mind's that war is serious and can not be taken lightly. The citizen's of this country could become more supportive of the war, if the government would allow the media to follow the soldiers, from departure to return, but could become rebellious against the war if the government seems to be hiding any details or facts from it's people. To me, when i read protect civilians i think as if they are trying to shield from us that War, is a harmful thing, and in which many people understand that war is not always a safe event.
ReplyDeleteI FEEL THAT IT IS CENSORSHIP DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE GOVERNMENT JUST WANTS TO HIDE THE TRUTH. PEOPLE ARE DYING LEFT AND RIGHT...AND THEY JUST WANT TO PROTECT THEIR IMAGE/REPUTATION.. IF PEOPLE SEE THAT PEOPLE ARE DYING IN A WAR... THEY WILL PANIC BECAUSE THEY MIGHT HAVE A BROTHER,SISTER,UNCLE,COUSIN OR SOME FAMILY MEMBER WHO'S LIFE IS AT STAKE. AND THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T WANT TO CAUSE A MASS UPROAR OF SCARED ANGRY CITIZENS... THE GOVERNMENT MAY ONLY WANT TO PROTECT THEMSELVES.. AND IS USING THE CITIZENS AS AN EXCUSE TO WASH AWAY THEIR DIRTY REP.
ReplyDeleteThe leader of the country appears to be protecting the country's morale. Images of coffins returning is a very powerful image. It causes a deep stir in the heart of those that have friends or family in the military. Images of war have a high potential for having very volatile responses. As long as the leader did not lie about the number of deaths occurring in the war, this is an act of protection. The leader is doing what must be done in order for the people of the country to stay strong and keep their head in the game. Two very essential things that will keep the citizens themselves out of coffins.
ReplyDeleteI think the banning of such images is censorship. I understand the idea of protecting citizens from the horrors of war, but I don't agree with the government deciding what should and should not be seen by a country's people. This issue is one that has been present during wars for decades, and I find it hard to ever believe that censoring real life is a positive idea. These images may induce a little panic, but at least civilians can see what is really going on in the war. The soldiers in those coffins do not only represent the loss of a person, but also a loss in the country's morale. These types of images make people feel all sorts of emotions about the war. They are sad that the soldier is dead, angry at the people who committed the act, and even hopeful for the future of the war. I think it is necessary for the public to decide how they feel about it, rather than allowing the government to decide for everyone.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I would say the act this unsaid government is committing is protection. Although no physical harm would be done by showing pictures of the coffins to the public, what about the emotional turmoil that families and loved ones are going through as their soldier's return? Is it even necessary to show these images in the first place? Many people that see the images would have no connection to the lost individuals, however I feel as if this ritual could potentially cause emotional distress to the families and loved ones of the soldier's lost at war.
ReplyDeleteThis is protection. Not only is it protection of the public to avoid panic but it is protection of the deceased soldiers rights and respect to the family members of that soldier. Censorship is not telling the public something that they need to know. The public is fully aware of how many soldiers have died in the war that is going on in their country. They do not need to see the images of the specific coffins coming back into their country. Who see's those images should be at the discretion of the family. The leader of this country is only trying to protect the people of the country including the soldiers.
ReplyDeleteThis is protection to its finest. No one wants to see the aftermath of fighting wars. Having body's taken off planes or whatever. This is why we have holidays celebrating the men and women who are protecting our country, aka Memorial Day. We as a people can only dwell on death to a certain point. So to have our government hide these images is a good thing. From personal experience i feel that seeing events like that will only cause more distrust and hatred between a people, or a war. Ask yourself this question" what if that was your son or daughter", would you want be see them in that state? In a coffin, for the world to see?
ReplyDeletei think that it is defiantly censorship and not protection. The reason that i think it is censorship is because there is no reason to hide the media of dead soldiers coffins when returned from war. People should be able to know the death rates and things like that. How are people suppose to know what is going on in the world especially with their own country if things are being hidden from us. It is a right of being a citizen to know the facts and details of things going on with their own country.
ReplyDeleteI in no way think this "rule" acts as protection and that it only keeps the public from seeing images that they should have the right to witness. I believe that the public should be exposed to all aspects of a war and that no information be hidden from public view. I would not want the citizens of my country have a viewpoint of the war that is entirely different from what it actually is. This censorship carries no good intention in my mind and if anything lessens the patriotism among the citizens of this country. If a country's general public is told no lies and is exposed to whatever they choose, I think that it would lead to an overall stronger bond amongst the people and create a stronger desire to win the war in order to protect their very own country.
ReplyDeleteIf anything i consider the banning of the images of dead soldiers coffins is censorship. By censoring these images the government does not protect its people. The censorship of images of this manner only helps to protect the government from protest by the civilian population. If anything the citizens of this country have right to view these images so that they can see what the war is costing them.
ReplyDeleteA lot of times it feels like the government is hiding important information from the people and it causes anger and panic among the people. In this case I believe this is good protection for the people. If the people saw the numerous coffins being brought back it would cause mass panic and might cause people to do something they might regret because they are not thinking rationally. By not showing the people these pictures, they are able to live their lives without worry and keep their spirits up in the wart effort. The leader is able to keep the country unified and if these pictures were shown, it might cause civil war between the peole who support the war and those who don't. The people might be angry that they are not allowed to see everything, but the leader would rather have the people a little bit angry at the government than have mass panic and lose control over his country.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are many things that should be censored, images of war should not be one of them. As shocking as it may be, images depicting the return of dead soldiers' coffins presents the grim and harsh reality of war. Civilians should be allowed to see the cost of what goes into their protection and the protection of the State. Images of war should not instill panic in the public, but instead show them what is happening in war, what they can do to help, and make sure they know the sacrifice of each and every person in the military. The leader of this country should not ban these images because they help the public form their own opinions about war and peace. A person who had never seen the horrors of war may be completely fine with going to war over a stupid reason or may even be desensitized to violence having never seen it first hand. So often in contemporary society is reality brushed under the rug and hidden from the public, we often cannot distinguish reality from surreality. Seeing is believing. If we cannot see something, how are we supposed to believe it is real? War and the gruesome events that make it up are real. Images should be shown in the media to present a realistic version of life, not the watered-down, fake, surrealistic version that we want to see.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this scenario, I would say that banning the publication of images depicting the return of dead soldiers' coffins is protection. I believe this because not only does it protect the soldiers' rights, it protects the viewers from seeing disturbing images that may or may not influence the way they feel about the war. Protecting the privacy of the soldiers' is not censorship, it's the right thing to do. And also, how do you think the soldiers' families would feel about the publication of these images? I think it would cause more pain and sorrow for the family. Others may think the family would want the images to be shown in order to honor the dead soldiers, but their are other ways to honor someone than revealing images that not only violate the solders' privacy and right, but may also cause more panic for the civilians in the country.
ReplyDeleteThis is an example of censorship in that it is blocking the public eye from what happens behind the scenes. Yes, it could be protecting us but censorship implies that this really happened and it has been caught on tape or in an image that these soldiers are being carried away in a coffin. The images are being cut away from viewers eyes as to make it appear something this horific never happened.
ReplyDeleteBanning the publication of images depicting the return of dead soldiers is censorship. By doing so, the government is denying the right of its citizens to comprehend the destruction of war. The people should have the right to decide whether or not the depiction of dead soldiers is detrimental to their well-being. By denying the public the right to comprehend the destruction of war, the government is demonstrating that it has the power over the people to censor anything. For example, if the government censors images, what is to stop them from censoring books? By censoring the destruction of war, you are depriving a group of individuals facts. So, if a government can censor war images, then it can take out significant information from books and media in a way that is misleading to the public. If a government censored certain parts of a book, the readers could be missing important information. Censorship is not protection, it is misleading of information. The result, mislead citizens.
ReplyDelete