The Australian Communications and Media Authority (2012) has the right to control Australian mass media. Speaking about mass media, the Internet, mobile phone content, TV, and radio are considered.
Australia, like many other countries in the world, has faced the problem of the information spread and the problem of the need of the information filtering. The problem of censorship has been discussed for several years and now it seems that the problem has become urgent.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority has the right to create a black-list for the websites which are considered as those which violate human rights. Moreover, the Australian Communications and Media Authority is responsible for plans on TV and radio channels (The Australian Communications and Media Authority 2012).
Having raised the problem of censorship, the Australian Communications and Media Authority has to decide whether to create a specific action for forbidding a group of programs and information leakage or to allow people watch whatever they want.
The problem became urgent when a top-secret blacklist of banned websites has been leaked. The society began to discuss the problem more actively either supporting or rejecting the reaction (Moses 2009).
The first part of the research is going to deal with the censorship in general. This part is going to include the analysis of the academic research and press articles devoted to the issue. Then, WikiLeaks is going to be compared with the porn and other similar sites which carry forbidden information.
The discussion is going to focus on the problem of WikiLeaks and whether the Australian Communications and Media Authority (2012) acts correctly trying to censor some specific Internet sites or it is important to allow people to be able to get the information they need and whether the actions taken for censorship are correct and do not require additional improvement or other actions are to be taken.
It is important to consider the opinion of people in relation to TV censorship and the Internet, whether there is a difference where the information should be censored or not. WikiLeaks is to be allowed for reading as people have the right to know the truth.
Speaking about the information devoted to the war in Afghanistan, for example, people should know what has happened in order to have an opportunity to analyze the actions for drawing appropriate conclusions (Pilger 2010).
Applying to authoritarian theory, I would like to research whether people support state control over the information they are to perceive or they would prefer to apply to the libertarianism or free press theory.
Considering which of the applied theories is better for presentation, I would search for the answers which have been stated in the problem under discussion (Suresh 2003).
The research should be based on the research explained in the academic articles and in newspaper articles where different people express their opinion in relation to the censorship of mass media in Australia. Much research has been conducted in the considered direction.
The Internet interviewing may be helpful in understanding the real state of affairs. The article by Loewenstein (2010) is devoted to the refusal to apply the Internet censorship in society.
Courier (2008) is sure that the main idea of censorship is to control society not to protect it. Therefore, people have an opportunity what information they want to watch and which is not.
Speaking about censorship of porn videos and other information of the similar type, it is considered as the most important one for consideration. However, Castronova (2009) is sure that porn another erotic data online supports communication through virtual reality.
Supporting this idea Rai (2012) wants to deliver the information that censorship is unnecessary is people are explained the basis of responsible watching. People should choose the information they want to consume themselves, however, they are to be responsible about their choice.
The same data is expressed in the articles by Russell and Irvine (2000) and McMasters (1999). They present the facts which help understand that censorship is important in several situations. TV and radio should be affected by censorship, especially during the day time.
Project Censored 2001 (2002) is the article which speaks about several examples how censorship refuses human right to free availability of information. Moreover, people do not have the right to get to know the latest news as according to the government, the information is not for the citizens.
Speaking about the theories under consideration and the literature which has been found, I can say that all the data is focused on two theories, libertarianism or free press ones, either to support or to refuse the right of the government to censor the information.
Nevertheless, much preference is referred to the refusal for a government to restrict human right in information approach. WikiLeaks is to be allowed as people have to know the truth, they are just to be responsible for what they are doing.
Having considered this information, further research should be focused on the ideas how responsible information reach may be achieved and what should be done in order to create differentiated access of the information in accordance with a human age.
Reference List
Castronova, E. 2009, ‘Fertility and Virtual Reality’, Washington and Lee Law Review, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 1085-1126.
Courier, D. 2008, ‘Do media control and censorship protect society?’, Dhaka, Proquest.
Loewenstein, A. 2010, ‘Governments should not censor the internet’, The Sydney Morning Herald. Web.
McMasters, P. K. 1999, ‘Must a civil society be a censored society?’, Human Rights, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 8-10.
Moses, A. 2009, ‘Leaked Australian blacklist reveals banned sites’, The Sydney Morning Herald. Web.
Pilger, J. 2010, ‘Why WikiLeaks must be protected’, New Statesman. p. 1-2.
‘Project Censored 2001: 10 important stories you couldn’t read in the mainstream media’ 2002, Syracuse New Times, p. 12.
Rai, J. 2012, ‘A social media: Freedom on the Net comes with responsibilities and reasonable restrictions’, Business Today.
Russell, J. S. & Irvine, A. D. 2000, ‘Don’t block free speech’, The Globe and Mail, p. A15.
‘Should the national government censor the media in order to protect the public?’ 2012, Debate.org. Web.
Suresh, K. 2003, ‘Theories of Communication’, Journalism and Mass Communication. Web.
The Australian Communications and Media Authority 2012. Web.