Examine individual changes

'{{Short description|Act of censoring or classifying one's own discourse}}'''Self-censorship''' is the act of [[censorship|censoring]] or [[Classified Information|classifying]] one's own [[discourse]]. This is done out of fear of, or deference to, the sensibilities or preferences (actual or perceived) of others and without overt pressure from any specific party or institution of authority. Self-censorship is often practiced by [[film producer]]s, [[film director]]s, [[publisher]]s, [[news anchor]]s, [[journalist]]s, [[musician]]s, and other kinds of [[author]]s including individuals who use [[social media]]. Article 19 of the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] guarantees [[freedom of speech]] from all forms of censorship. Article 19 explicitly states that "everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."<ref>University of Salzburg, [http://www.salzburg.umd.edu/media-innovation/journalism-self-censorship Journalism Self-Censorship, Global Self-Censorship Struggles: Lebanon, Mexico, China, Hong Kong and Slovakia] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141209093642/http://www.salzburg.umd.edu/media-innovation/journalism-self-censorship |date=December 9, 2014 }}</ref> The practice of self-censorship, like that of censorship itself, has a long history.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Baltussen|first1=Han|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fm49CgAAQBAJ&q=Self-censorship&pg=PP1|title=The Art of Veiled Speech: Self-Censorship from Aristophanes to Hobbes|last2=Davis|first2=Peter J.|date=2015-07-27|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|isbn=978-0-8122-9163-6|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Baltussen|first1=Han|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fm49CgAAQBAJ&q=Self-censorship&pg=PA18|title=The Art of Veiled Speech: Self-Censorship from Aristophanes to Hobbes|last2=Davis|first2=Peter J.|date=2015-07-27|publisher=University of Pennsylvania Press|isbn=978-0-8122-9163-6|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315246048-12/censorship-self-censorship-late-sixteenth-century-english-book-illustration-richard-williams|chapter=Censorship and Self-censorship in Late Sixteenth-century English Book Illustration|title=Printed Images in Early Modern Britain Essays in Interpretation|editor=Michael Hunter|year=2016|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-315-24604-8|language=en|doi=10.4324/9781315246048|author=Richard L. Williams}}</ref> == Reasons for self-expression == === Psychological === People often communicate to affirm their identity and sense of belonging.&nbsp; People may express their opinions or withhold their opinions due to the fear of exclusion or unpopularity. Shared social norms and beliefs create a sense of belonging, but they can also create a suppression of expression in order to comply or belong. People may adjust their beliefs or opinions to go along with the majority attitude. There are different factors that contribute to self-censorship, such as gender, age, education, political interests, and media exposure. For some, the reason for their change in beliefs and opinions is rooted in fear of isolation and exclusion. For these people, the expression of their own beliefs is less important than the fear of negative reactions of others to the expression of those beliefs.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bar‐Tal|first=Daniel|date=2017|title=Self-Censorship as a Socio-Political-Psychological Phenomenon: Conception and Research|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/pops.12391|journal=Political Psychology|language=en|volume=38|issue=S1|pages=37–65|doi=10.1111/pops.12391|issn=1467-9221}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Detert|first1=James R.|last2=Edmondson|first2=Amy C.|date=2011-06-01|title=Implicit Voice Theories: Taken-for-Granted Rules of Self-Censorship at Work|url=https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2011.61967925|journal=Academy of Management Journal|volume=54|issue=3|pages=461–488|doi=10.5465/amj.2011.61967925|issn=0001-4273}}</ref> According to a 2019 German survey on self-censorship conducted by the Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach for the newspaper ''[[Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung]]'' (FAZ), 59% of respondents said they can express their views among friends, but only 18% believe the same is possible in public. Only 17% of respondents express themselves freely on the Internet.<ref>{{cite news|last=Köcher|first=Renate|date=22 May 2019|title=Immer mehr Tabuthemen|work=Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung|url=https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/allensbach-umfrage-ueber-meinungsfreiheit-und-kritische-themen-16200724.html}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Mehrheit der Deutschen äußert sich in der Öffentlichkeit nur vorsichtig |url=https://www.welt.de/politik/article193977845/Deutsche-sehen-Meinungsfreiheit-in-der-Oeffentlichkeit-eingeschraenkt.html |work=[[Die Welt]] |date=22 May 2019}}</ref> Religious affiliation is a topic in which many occupational fields and areas may be a source of self-censorship. One particular area is psychology. From the origins of psychology, the field has frequently viewed religion with distrust. Psychologists and therapists often refrain from claiming to be part of any religion believing in the possibility that any expressions of any devout faith may be viewed as markers for mental illness or distress. A 2013 survey from the American Psychological Association (APA) found that “relative to the general population, psychologists were more than twice likely to claim no religion, three times more likely to describe religion as unimportant in their lives, and five times more likely to deny belief in God.”<ref>{{Cite journal|author1=Rosik, Christopher H.|author2=Teraoka, Nicole A.|author3=Moretto, James D|date=2016|title=Religiously-based prejudice and self-censorship: Perceptions and experiences among Christian therapists and educators|url=https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-26648-006|journal=Journal of Psychology and Christianity|pages=52–67}}</ref> Regarding a religious movement it is more common among fundamentalist believers like [[Wahhabism]], [[Islamism]], [[Calvinism]], and [[Hasidic Judaism]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Habermas|first1=Jurgen|year=2006|title=Religion in the Public Sphere|journal=European Journal of Philosophy|volume=14|pages=1–25|doi=10.1111/j.1468-0378.2006.00241.x}}</ref>{{page needed|date=January 2015}} === Economic === Self-censorship can also occur in order to conform to the expectations of the market. For example, the editor of a periodical may consciously or unconsciously avoid topics that will anger advertisers, customers, or the owners in order to protect their livelihood either directly (i.e., fear of losing their job) or indirectly (e.g., a belief that a book will be more profitable if it does not contain offensive material).<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2013-01-01|title=Concentration and self-censorship in commercial media|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272712001089|journal=Journal of Public Economics|language=en|volume=97|pages=117–130|doi=10.1016/j.jpubeco.2012.09.009|issn=0047-2727|last1=Germano|first1=Fabrizio|last2=Meier|first2=Martin|hdl=10230/11728|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gray|first1=Garry C.|last2=Kendzia|first2=Victoria Bishop|date=2009|title=Organizational Self-Censorship: Corporate Sponsorship, Nonprofit Funding, and the Educational Experience*|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1755-618X.2009.01209.x|journal=Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie|language=en|volume=46|issue=2|pages=161–177|doi=10.1111/j.1755-618X.2009.01209.x|s2cid=146421736|issn=1755-618X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hassid|first=Jonathan|date=2020-06-01|title=Censorship, the Media, and the Market in China|url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-020-09660-0|journal=Journal of Chinese Political Science|language=en|volume=25|issue=2|pages=285–309|doi=10.1007/s11366-020-09660-0|s2cid=216446374|issn=1874-6357}}</ref> This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as [[Independent Media#Soft censorship|soft censorship]]. === Legal === In [[authoritarianism|authoritarian]] countries, creators of artworks may remove material that their government might find controversial for fear of sanction by their governments.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Shen|first1=Xiaoxiao|last2=Truex|first2=Rory|date=2021|title=In Search of Self-Censorship|journal=British Journal of Political Science|language=en|volume=51|issue=4|pages=1672–1684|doi=10.1017/S0007123419000735|issn=0007-1234|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tannenberg|first=Marcus|date=2017-06-01|title=The Autocratic Trust Bias: Politically Sensitive Survey Items and Self-Censorship|url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2980727|language=en|location=Rochester, NY|ssrn=2980727}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Robinson|first1=Darrel|last2=Tannenberg|first2=Marcus|date=2018-04-01|title=Self-Censorship in Authoritarian States: Response Bias in Measures of Popular Support in China|url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3161915|language=en|location=Rochester, NY|ssrn=3161915}}</ref> In [[Cultural pluralism|pluralistic]] [[capitalism|capitalist]] countries, repressive [[judicial activism|judicial lawmaking]] can also cause widespread [[River crab (Internet slang)|"rivercrabbing"]] of Western media.<ref name="RC">{{Cite news|author=Steven Swinford|date=23 May 2011|title=Ryan Giggs: from golden boy to tarnished idol|work=The Telegraph|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/8532042/Ryan-Giggs-from-golden-boy-to-tarnished-idol.html|access-date=28 May 2011}}</ref> ===Taste and decency=== [[Taste (sociology)|Taste]] and [[decency]] are other areas in which questions are often raised regarding self-censorship. Art or journalism involving images or footage of [[murder]], [[terrorism]], [[war]] and [[Wiktionary:massacre|massacres]] may cause complaints as to the purpose to which they are put. [[Curator]]s and [[Editing|editors]] will frequently censor these images to avoid charges of [[prurience]], [[shock tactic]]s or [[invasion of privacy]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cook|first1=Philip|last2=Heilmann|first2=Conrad|date=2013-03-01|title=Two Types of Self-Censorship: Public and Private|url=https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00957.x|journal=Political Studies|language=en|volume=61|issue=1|pages=178–196|doi=10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00957.x|s2cid=142634871|issn=0032-3217|hdl=20.500.11820/9b485cf0-e99f-4c5d-bfe6-652521c12299|hdl-access=free}}</ref> Concepts like [[political correctness]] and [[spiral of silence]] have been found to contribute to the existence of self-censorship.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=LOURY|first=GLENN C.|date=1994-10-01|title=Self-Censorship in Public Discourse: A Theory of "Political Correctness" and Related Phenomena|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463194006004002|journal=Rationality and Society|language=en|volume=6|issue=4|pages=428–461|doi=10.1177/1043463194006004002|s2cid=143057168|issn=1043-4631}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kwon|first1=K. Hazel|last2=Moon|first2=Shin-Il|last3=Stefanone|first3=Michael A.|date=2015-07-01|title=Unspeaking on Facebook? Testing network effects on self-censorship of political expressions in social network sites|url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0078-8|journal=Quality & Quantity|language=en|volume=49|issue=4|pages=1417–1435|doi=10.1007/s11135-014-0078-8|s2cid=7489939|issn=1573-7845}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hoffmann|first1=Christian Pieter|last2=Lutz|first2=Christoph|date=2017-07-28|title=Spiral of Silence 2.0: Political Self-Censorship among Young Facebook Users|url=https://doi.org/10.1145/3097286.3097296|journal=Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Social Media & Society|series=#SMSociety17|location=Toronto, ON, Canada|publisher=Association for Computing Machinery|pages=1–12|doi=10.1145/3097286.3097296|isbn=978-1-4503-4847-8|s2cid=19728058}}</ref> Products intended for children and youthful audiences, such as [[young adult literature]], can be affected by self-censorship in this context.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Freedman|first1=Lauren|last2=Johnson|first2=Holly|date=2000|title=Who's Protecting Whom? "I Hadn't Meant to Tell You This", a Case in Point in Confronting Self-Censorship in the Choice of Young Adult Literature|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40015350|journal=Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy|volume=44|issue=4|pages=356–369|jstor=40015350|issn=1081-3004}}</ref> When the director of the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art was interviewed regarding his decision to whitewash an antiwar mural showing dollar-draped military coffins, he speculated that the mural would have offended the community in which it was placed. He then added that "there were zero complaints, because I took care of it right away,".<ref name="deitch">{{Cite news|author=Finkel, Jori|date=2010-12-15|title=Museum of Contemporary Art commissions, then paints over, artwork|newspaper=Los Angeles Times|url=http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-1214-moca-mural-20101214,0,4436829.story}}</ref> === As a form of preference falsification === Self-censorship is a form of [[preference falsification]], though the concepts are not identical.  Self-censorship is a passive act. It amounts to the suppression of potentially objectionable beliefs, opinions, and preferences. Thus, it amounts to self-silencing; it is an act of passivity. Preference falsification is the misrepresentation of one’s preferences under perceived social pressures.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kuran |first=Timur |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HlKBaiCpSxYC&dq=private+truth+public+lies&pg=PR9 |title=Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification |date=1997 |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-70758-0 |language=en}}</ref> It is often performative, as it can involve the active manipulation of one’s preferences to impress an audience or avoid its wrath.   For an illustration, consider a discussion on a controversial subject. We are among the participants. If we keep quiet, that is self-censorship. Insofar as our silence conveys agreement with a position that we actually dislike, our self-censorship amounts also to preference falsification. If instead of keeping quiet, we speak up during the discussion in favor of position A, when we actually favor B, that is preference falsification but not self-censorship. In pretending to like A, we have gone beyond self-censorship. We have deliberately projected a contrived opinion. In a nutshell, [[preference falsification]] is the broader concept. Whereas all self-censorship falsifies a preference through the signals it sends, preference falsification need not take the form of self-censorship. ==In media== {{See also|Freedom of the press}} Journalists often censor themselves due to threats against them or their interests from another party,<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/29/milk.security/index.html |title=Milk-threat study issued over objections |publisher=CNN.com |author=Jeanne Meserve |date=June 29, 2005 |access-date=2008-09-27}}</ref> editorial instructions from their supervisor[s], perceived conflicts of interest with a media organization's economic sponsors, advertisers or shareholders,<ref name="Noam Chomsky 1994">Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky ''Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media'', Vintage, 1994, {{ISBN|0-09-953311-1}}</ref> etc.). Self-censorship occurs when journalists deliberately manipulate their expression out of fear of, or deference to, the sensibilities or preferences (actual or perceived) of others and without overt pressure from any specific party or institution of authority. Self-censorship of journalists is most pervasive in societies where governments have official [[media censorship]] policies and where journalists will be jailed, fined, or simply lose their job if they do not follow the censorship rules.{{citation needed|date=September 2015}} Organizations such as ([[Media Matters for America]],<ref>Media Matters for America: [http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002 33 internal Fox editorial memos reviewed by MMFA reveal]</ref> [[Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting]],<ref>FAIR: [http://www.fair.org/media-woes/censorship.html Censorship] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050118214825/http://www.fair.org/media-woes/censorship.html |date=2005-01-18 }}</ref> ''[[Democracy Now!]]'', and the [[American Civil Liberties Union]]) have raised concerns about news broadcasting stations, particularly [[Fox News]], censoring their own content to be less controversial when reporting on certain types of issues such as the [[War on Terror]]. In their book ''[[Manufacturing Consent]]'' (1988), [[Noam Chomsky]] and [[Edward S. Herman]] argue that corporate ownership of news media very strongly encourages systematic self-censorship owing to market forces.<ref name="Noam Chomsky 1994"/> In this argument, even with supposedly liberal media, bias and (often unconscious) self-censorship is evident in the selection and omission of news stories, and the framing of acceptable discussion, in line with the interests of the corporations owning those media. The [[journalism|journalists]] have actively sought censorship advice from military authorities in order to prevent the inadvertent revelation of military secrets. In 2009, ''[[The New York Times]]'' succeeded in suppressing news of a reporter's abduction by [[Terrorist|militants]] in [[Afghanistan]] for seven months until his escape from captivity in order to 'reduce danger to the reporter and other hostages'.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090620/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_nyt_reporter |title=New York Times reporter escapes Taliban captivity |publisher=Associated Press |author=JASON STRAZIUSO |date=June 20, 2005 |access-date=2009-06-20 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090623101727/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090620/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_nyt_reporter |archive-date=June 23, 2009 }}</ref> Journalists have sometimes self-censored publications of news stories out of concern for the safety of people involved. Jean Pelletier, the Washington D.C. correspondent for the Montreal ''[[La Presse (Canadian newspaper)|La Presse]]'' newspaper, uncovered a covert attempt by the [[Government of Canada|Canadian government]] to smuggle US diplomats out of [[Iran]] during the [[Iranian Hostage Crisis]] before the "[[Canadian Caper]]" had reached its conclusion. In order to preserve the safety of those involved, he refused to allow the paper to publish the story until the hostages had left Iran, despite the considerable news value to the paper and writer.{{citation needed|date=September 2015}} Self-censorship by journalists has been described as a form of a survival strategy, allowing journalists to report on some issues rather than going too far and risking a more complete crackdown by the authorities, resulting in even less independent reporting.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Walulya|first1=Gerald|last2=Nassanga|first2=Goretti L.|date=2020-02-25|title=Democracy at Stake: Self-Censorship as a Self-Defence Strategy for Journalists|url=https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/2512|journal=Media and Communication|language=en|volume=8|issue=1|pages=5–14|doi=10.17645/mac.v8i1.2512|issn=2183-2439|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Larsen|first1=Anna Grøndahl|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q6HsDwAAQBAJ&q=Self-censorship&pg=PT11|title=Journalist Safety and Self-Censorship|last2=Fadnes|first2=Ingrid|last3=Krøvel|first3=Roy|date=2020-07-08|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-000-07487-1|language=en}}</ref> ==In science== [[File:Self-censorship in a Chinese academic journal.png|thumb|Self-censorship in a Chinese academic journal: an editor asks the article's author to remove a sentence about [[blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China]] as it could cause trouble with the "authorities"]] Self-censorship is found in the world of academia in a number of contexts.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Chamlee-Wright|first=Emily|date=2019-12-01|title=Self-Censorship and Associational Life in the Liberal Academy|journal=Society|language=en|volume=56|issue=6|pages=538–549|doi=10.1007/s12115-019-00413-1|issn=1936-4725|doi-access=free}}</ref> Self-censorship in scientific publications that have been criticized as politically motivated include scientists under the [[Nazi Germany|Third Reich]] withholding findings that disagreed with the commonly held beliefs in differences between races, or the refusal of these scientists under [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler]] to support [[General Relativity]] (which got the reputation as "Jewish science"). More recently, certain scientists have withheld their findings related to [[climate change]]s caused by pollution and to endangered species.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/11/tech/main673232.shtml |title=Scientific Method: Self-Censorship, Study Finds Researchers Shy Away From Controversial Projects |publisher=CBS News |author=Ayaz Nanji |date=February 11, 2005 |access-date=2008-09-27}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home-nation |title=U.S. Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |author=Julie Cart |page=A-13 |date=February 10, 2005 |access-date=2008-09-27 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050224091757/http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-scientists10feb10,0,4954654.story?coll=la-home-nation |archive-date=February 24, 2005 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml |title=Rewriting The Science, Scientist Says Politicians Edit Global Warming Research |publisher=CBS News |author=Daniel Schorn |date=July 30, 2006 |access-date=2008-09-27}}</ref> Professor [[Heinz Klatt]] argues that [[hate speech|hate laws]], [[speech code]]s, cowardice, and [[political correctness]] have resulted in an intellectually repressive atmosphere in modern-day academic circles, with widespread self-censorship on topics like homosexuality, (learning) disabilities, Islam, and genetic differences between human races and sexes.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=Opinions&articleID=1099 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090221043937/http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/article.cfm?section=Opinions&articleID=1099 |url-status=dead |archive-date=February 21, 2009 |title=Self-censorship the bane of academic life |publisher=The Gazette (University of Western Ontario) |author=Heinz Klatt |date=October 27, 2006 |access-date=2008-09-27 }}</ref> ===Risks from scientific publications=== {{See also|Information hazard}} In the early days of [[atomic physics]], it was realized that discoveries regarding [[nuclear fission]] and the chain reaction might be used for both beneficial and harmful purposes - on the one hand, such discoveries could have important applications for medicine and energy production, however on the other hand, they might also lead to the production of unprecedented [[weapons of mass destruction]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Schweber|first1=Silvan S.|title=In the Shadow of the Bomb: Oppenheimer, Bethe, and the Moral Responsibility of the Scientist|isbn=978-0691127859|date=2007-01-07}}</ref> [[Leo Szilard]] argues that if dangerous discoveries were kept secret, the development and use of such weapons might be avoided.<ref name="who">{{cite journal|last1=Selgelid|first1=Michael J.|title=Governance of dual-use research: an ethical dilemma|journal=Bulletin of the World Health Organization|year=2009|volume=87|issue=9|pages=720–3|url=https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/87/9/08-051383/en/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120406142104/http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/87/9/08-051383/en/|url-status=dead|archive-date=April 6, 2012|publisher=World health Organization|doi=10.2471/blt.08.051383|pmid=19784453|pmc=2739909|access-date=15 February 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Pelopidas|first=Benoît|date=2016-11-01|title=Nuclear Weapons Scholarship as a Case of Self-Censorship in Security Studies|url=https://doi.org/10.1093/jogss/ogw017|journal=Journal of Global Security Studies|volume=1|issue=4|pages=326–336|doi=10.1093/jogss/ogw017|issn=2057-3170}}</ref> Similarly, findings in the field of medicine and biotechnology could facilitate production of biological weapons of mass destruction.<ref>{{cite web|title=The darker bioweapons future|url=https://fas.org/irp/cia/product/bw1103.pdf|publisher=Central Intelligence Agency|access-date=15 February 2016|date=November 3, 2003}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Broad|first1=William J.|title=Bioterror Researchers Build A More Lethal Mousepox|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/01/us/bioterror-researchers-build-a-more-lethal-mousepox.html|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=15 February 2016|date=November 1, 2003}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|last1=Nowak|first1=Rachel|title=Killer mousepox virus raises bioterror fears|url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn311-killer-mousepox-virus-raises-bioterror-fears/|magazine=New Scientist|access-date=15 February 2016|date=10 January 2001}}</ref> In 2003 members of the Journal Editors and Authors Group, 32 leading journal editors, perceived the threat from [[biological warfare]] as sufficiently high to warrant a system of self-censorship on the public dissemination of certain aspects of their community's research. The statement agreed on declared:<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/spru/hsp/documents/Reactions%20to%20Selfcensorship.pdf | title=Reactions to Self-censorship | date=2003 | access-date=15 February 2016 | author=McLeish, C.A. | pages=1}}</ref> <blockquote>We recognize that the prospect of [[bioterrorism]] has raised legitimate concerns about the potential abuse of published information... We are committed to dealing responsibly and effectively with safety and security issues that may be raised by papers submitted for publication, and to increasing our capacity to identify such issues as they arise...[O]n occasions an editor may conclude that the potential harm of publication outweighs the potential societal benefits... the paper should be modified, or not be published...</blockquote> == By region == === Africa === Self-censorship has been found to affect journalists in a number of less-democratic African states, such as [[Ethiopia]], [[Uganda]] and [[Zambia]].<ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Skjerdal|first=Terje|date=2010-12-18|title=Justifying Self-Censorship: A Perspective from Ethiopia|url=https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1742843|language=en|location=Rochester, NY|ssrn=1742843}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Moges|first=Mulatu Alemayehu|date=2017|title=Ethiopian Journalism from Self-Censoring to Silence: A Case of Reporting on Internal Conflict|url=https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=555106|journal=ESSACHESS - Journal for Communication Studies|language=English|volume=X|issue=1|pages=111–128|issn=2066-5083}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Parks|first1=Lisa|last2=Mukherjee|first2=Rahul|date=2017-07-03|title=From platform jumping to self-censorship: internet freedom, social media, and circumvention practices in Zambia|url=https://nca.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14791420.2017.1290262|journal=Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies|volume=14|issue=3|pages=221–237|doi=10.1080/14791420.2017.1290262|s2cid=152083308|issn=1479-1420}}</ref><ref>Jaygbay, Jacob. "[https://search.proquest.com/openview/d575d1b7fddf5e3aae7a673be0f5c48c/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=37755&casa_token=mBh4YxNF2sYAAAAA:Xe6U-V5CwbeZuPtGyD9c6xzlkGEVKfGrRI68NUikX3ruwFw11gT2HTq9Oq11qp9sCC7XYBuGCg Self-censorship in African scholarship and scholarly publishing]." ''Journal of scholarly publishing'' 29, no. 2 (1998): 112.</ref> === Central Asia === Widespread practice of self-censorship has been described as significantly detrimental to the development of independent journalism in [[Central Asia]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kenny|first1=Timothy|last2=Gross|first2=Peter|date=2008-10-01|title=Journalism in Central Asia: A Victim of Politics, Economics, and Widespread Self-censorship|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161208324644|journal=The International Journal of Press/Politics|language=en|volume=13|issue=4|pages=515–525|doi=10.1177/1940161208324644|s2cid=143809799|issn=1940-1612}}</ref> === China === {{See also|Censorship in China|Chinese censorship abroad}} In China, the media and citizens have to go to even greater extents to censor much of the material that they would post online.<ref name="Lee 112–133">{{Cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=Francis L.F.|last2=Chan|first2=Joseph|date=2009-01-01|title=Organizational Production of Self-Censorship in the Hong Kong Media|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161208326598|journal=The International Journal of Press/Politics|language=en|volume=14|issue=1|pages=112–133|doi=10.1177/1940161208326598|s2cid=143852567|issn=1940-1612}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tong|first=Jingrong|date=2009-09-01|title=Press self-censorship in China: a case study in the transformation of discourse|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926509106412|journal=Discourse & Society|language=en|volume=20|issue=5|pages=593–612|doi=10.1177/0957926509106412|s2cid=144245109|issn=0957-9265}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Lee|first=Chin-Chuan|date=1998-03-01|title=Press Self-Censorship and Political Transition in Hong Kong|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X98003002005|journal=Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics|language=en|volume=3|issue=2|pages=55–73|doi=10.1177/1081180X98003002005|s2cid=145765508|issn=1081-180X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Zhong|first1=Zhi-Jin|last2=Wang|first2=Tongchen|last3=Huang|first3=Minting|date=2017-01-01|title=Does the Great Fire Wall cause self-censorship? The effects of perceived internet regulation and the justification of regulation|url=https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-07-2016-0204|journal=Internet Research|volume=27|issue=4|pages=974–990|doi=10.1108/IntR-07-2016-0204|issn=1066-2243}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Robinson|first1=Darrel|last2=Tannenberg|first2=Marcus|date=2019-07-01|title=Self-censorship of regime support in authoritarian states: Evidence from list experiments in China|journal=Research & Politics|language=en|volume=6|issue=3|pages=2053168019856449|doi=10.1177/2053168019856449|issn=2053-1680|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=Francis L.F.|last2=Lin|first2=Angel M.Y.|date=2006-05-01|title=Newspaper editorial discourse and the politics of self-censorship in Hong Kong|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506062371|journal=Discourse & Society|language=en|volume=17|issue=3|pages=331–358|doi=10.1177/0957926506062371|hdl=10722/92430|s2cid=53127938|issn=0957-9265|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Wang|first=Natasha Khan and Joyu|date=2020-07-02|title=Hong Kong's Security Law Scares Citizens Into Scrubbing Social Media, Self-Censorship|language=en-US|work=Wall Street Journal|url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/hong-kongers-self-censor-as-security-law-bites-11593696720|access-date=2021-05-14|issn=0099-9660}}</ref> Many companies{{who|date=October 2021}} have been shut down by government because of the content that they have published. Nearly 10,000 social media accounts in October 2018 were shut down that published entertainment and celebrity news.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Kuo|first=Lily|date=2018-12-31|title=From 'rice bunny' to 'back up the car': China's year of censorship|language=en-GB|work=The Guardian|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/31/from-rice-bunny-to-back-up-the-car-chinas-year-of-censorship|access-date=2019-04-11|issn=0261-3077}}</ref> As well as 370 different streaming apps that were pulled off of the app stores for non-compliance.<ref name=":1">"In China, a circle of online self-censorship; Threat of being shut down for violating laws pushes internet firms to police their networks." ''Globe & Mail'' [Toronto, Canada], 5 June 2018, p. A1. ''World History in Context'', http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A541400341/WHIC?u=mcc_pv&sid=WHIC&xid=61681362. Accessed 11 Apr. 2019.</ref> Due to these high numbers of government interference, the companies and networks that publish on the internet are now employing people and utilizing sophisticated programs to find videos and pictures that are offensive to remove before the government can get them in trouble.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Zhen|first=Simon K.|date=2015|title=An Explanation of Self-Censorship in China: The Enforcement of Social Control Through a Panoptic Infrastructure|url=http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1093/an-explanation-of-self-censorship-in-china-the-enforcement-of-social-control-through-a-panoptic-infrastructure|journal=Inquiries Journal|language=en|volume=7|issue=9}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|title=View of China's Censorship 2.0: How companies censor bloggers {{!}} First Monday|url=https://firstmonday.org/article/view/2378/2089|access-date=2021-05-14|journal=First Monday|date=25 January 2009|doi=10.5210/fm.v14i2.2378|last1=MacKinnon|first1=Rebecca}}</ref> Self-censorship by Western{{clarify|date=October 2021}} companies trying to appease Chinese authorities has also affected the quality of content available to the citizens in other countries.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The big business of self-censorship over China - UCA News|url=https://www.ucanews.com/news/the-big-business-of-self-censorship-over-china/85391|access-date=2021-05-14|website=ucanews.com|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=O'Brien|first=Danny|title=Who pays price for internet self-censorship in China?|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/business/who-pays-price-for-internet-self-censorship-in-china-1.1007332|access-date=2021-05-14|newspaper=The Irish Times|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last1=Siegel|first1=Tatiana|date=2020-08-05|title=Hollywood Is "Increasingly Normalizing" Self-Censorship for China, Report Finds|url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/hollywood-is-increasingly-normalizing-censorship-china-report-finds-1305935/|access-date=2021-05-14|website=The Hollywood Reporter|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|author=The Editorial Board|date=2019-10-19|title=Opinion {{!}} The Chinese Threat to American Speech|language=en-US|work=The New York Times|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/19/opinion/sunday/china-nba.html|access-date=2021-05-14|issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Jaw-Nian|first=Huang|date=2017-09-01|title=The China Factor in Taiwan's Media. Outsourcing Chinese Censorship Abroad|url=http://journals.openedition.org/chinaperspectives/7388|journal=China Perspectives|language=en|volume=2017|issue=2017/3|pages=27–36|doi=10.4000/chinaperspectives.7388|issn=2070-3449|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-05|title=Made in Hollywood, Censored by Beijing|url=https://pen.org/report/made-in-hollywood-censored-by-beijing/|access-date=2021-05-14|website=PEN America|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Fish|first=Isaac Stone|date=2018-09-04|title=The Other Political Correctness|magazine=The New Republic|url=https://newrepublic.com/article/150476/american-elite-universities-selfcensorship-china|access-date=2021-05-14|issn=0028-6583}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2013-12-10|title=Self-censorship is Beijing's most effective gag on truth|url=https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1377510/self-censorship-beijings-most-effective-gag-truth|access-date=2021-05-14|website=South China Morning Post|language=en}}</ref> It increasingly affects video games, including those by Western developers who want to sell their products to Chinese gamers as well.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-07-15|title=No cults, no politics, no ghouls: how China censors the video game world {{!}} Games {{!}} The Guardian|website=[[TheGuardian.com]]|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/jul/15/china-video-game-censorship-tencent-netease-blizzard|access-date=2021-07-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210715053125/https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/jul/15/china-video-game-censorship-tencent-netease-blizzard|archive-date=2021-07-15}}</ref> === Colombia === Self-censorship has been found to affect Colombian journalism.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Barrios|first1=Marta Milena|last2=Miller|first2=Toby|date=2020-06-12|title=Voices of Resilience: Colombian Journalists and Self-Censorship in the Post-Conflict Period|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1778506|journal=Journalism Practice|volume=15|issue=10|pages=1423–1440|doi=10.1080/17512786.2020.1778506|s2cid=225697881|issn=1751-2786}}</ref> ===Europe=== Examples of self-censorship have been found in a number of European countries in different contexts.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Schimpfössl|first1=Elisabeth|last2=Yablokov|first2=Ilya|last3=Zeveleva|first3=Olga|last4=Fedirko|first4=Taras|last5=Bajomi-Lazar|first5=Peter|date=2020-02-01|title=Self-censorship narrated: Journalism in Central and Eastern Europe|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323119897801|journal=European Journal of Communication|language=en|volume=35|issue=1|pages=3–11|doi=10.1177/0267323119897801|s2cid=213509921|issn=0267-3231}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Iordanidou|first1=Sofia|last2=Takas|first2=Emmanouil|last3=Vatikiotis|first3=Leonidas|last4=García|first4=Pedro|date=2020-02-25|title=Constructing Silence: Processes of Journalistic (Self-)Censorship during Memoranda in Greece, Cyprus, and Spain|url=https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/2634|journal=Media and Communication|language=en|volume=8|issue=1|pages=15–26|doi=10.17645/mac.v8i1.2634|issn=2183-2439|doi-access=free}}</ref> European Union officials have been accused of self-censorship on [[Chinese censorship abroad|topics deemed sensitive by China]], in order to avoid diplomatic rifts between China and EU.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Taylor|first=Max Roger|date=May 26, 2020|title=China-EU relations: self-censorship by EU diplomats is commonplace|url=http://theconversation.com/china-eu-relations-self-censorship-by-eu-diplomats-is-commonplace-138181|access-date=2021-05-14|website=The Conversation|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-05-13 |title=EU diplomats face the enemy within |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-china-diplomatic-problem-eeas/ |access-date=2023-01-24 |website=POLITICO |language=en-US}}</ref> Threats to media freedom have shown a significant increase in recent years in Europe. Journalists and [[whistleblower]]s have experienced physical and psychological intimidation and threats. Self-censorship is one of the major consequences of such circumstances.<ref>{{Cite news|date=20 April 2017|title=New study on intimidation of journalists and self-censorship in Europe|work=Council of Europe. Newsroom|url=https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-rule-of-law/-/new-study-on-intimidation-of-journalists-and-self-censorship-in-europe?desktop=false|access-date=12 May 2017}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last1=CLARK|first1=Marilyn|url=https://rm.coe.int/168070ad5d|title=Journalism under pressure. Unwarranted interference, fear and self-censorship in Europe|last2=GRECH|first2=Anna|publisher=Council of Europe publishing|year=2017|location=Strasbourg|access-date=12 May 2017}}</ref> A study published in 2017 by the [[Council of Europe]] found that in the period 2014-2016 that 40% of journalists involved in the survey experienced some kind of unwarranted interference, in particular psychological violence, including slandering and smear campaigning, cyberbulling. Other forms of unwarranted interference include intimidation by interest groups, threats with force, intimidation by political groups, targeted surveillance, intimidation by the police, etc. In terms of geography, cases of physical assault were more common in the South Caucasus, followed by Turkey, but were present in other regions as well.<ref name=":0" /> === Indonesia === In the early 2010s, self-censorship was studied in the context of professional practice of many Indonesian newspaper journalists.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tapsell|first=Ross|date=2012-06-01|title=Old Tricks in a New Era: Self-Censorship in Indonesian Journalism|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10357823.2012.685926|journal=Asian Studies Review|volume=36|issue=2|pages=227–245|doi=10.1080/10357823.2012.685926|s2cid=144494432|issn=1035-7823}}</ref> === Palestine === Self-censorship was found in Israeli media during the [[Second Lebanon War]].<ref>Elbaz, Sagi, and Daniel Bar-Tal. "[https://regener-online.de/journalcco/2019_2/pdf/elbaz-bar-tal2019.pdf Voluntary silence: Israeli media self-censorship during the Second Lebanon War]." ''Conflict & communication'' 18, no. 2 (2019).</ref> It has also been found to affect a number of debates related to the [[Israeli–Palestinian conflict|Israeli-Palestinian conflict]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hameiri|first1=Boaz|last2=Sharvit|first2=Keren|last3=Bar‐Tal|first3=Daniel|last4=Shahar|first4=Eldad|last5=Halperin|first5=Eran|date=2017|title=Support for Self-Censorship Among Israelis as a Barrier to Resolving the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict|url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/pops.12346|journal=Political Psychology|language=en|volume=38|issue=5|pages=795–813|doi=10.1111/pops.12346|issn=1467-9221}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Nets-Zehngut|first1=Rafi|last2=Pliskin|first2=Ruthie|last3=Bar-Tal|first3=Daniel|date=August 2015|title=Self-censorship in conflicts: Israel and the 1948 Palestinian exodus.|url=https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/pac0000094|journal=Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology|volume=21|issue=3|pages=479–499|doi=10.1037/pac0000094|issn=1532-7949}}</ref> === Pakistan === Self-censorship practices have been studied in the context of the Pakistani media in 2000s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Nadadur|first=Ramanujan D.|date=2007-06-01|title=Self-Censorship In The Pakistani Print Media|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/097152310701400105|journal=South Asian Survey|language=en|volume=14|issue=1|pages=45–63|doi=10.1177/097152310701400105|s2cid=154492288|issn=0971-5231}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780367810139-3/red-lines-journalism-sadia-jamil|title=Red lines of journalism : Digital surveillance, safety risks and journalists' self-censorship in Pakistan|date=2020-07-08|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0-367-81013-9|language=en|doi=10.4324/9780367810139-3|s2cid=225758680}}</ref> === Russia === Self-censorship existed in Russia for a long time.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kelly|first=Aileen|date=1987|title=Self-Censorship and the Russian Intelligentsia, 1905-1914|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2498907|journal=Slavic Review|volume=46|issue=2|pages=193–213|doi=10.2307/2498907|jstor=2498907|s2cid=159614500 |issn=0037-6779}}</ref> After a brief relaxation following the [[fall of communism]] in the 1990s, self-censorship once again became a quite frequent practice in Russia after 2000's government take-overs and consolidation of media, further deepened after 2014-2015 laws on 'undesirable organisations'.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Russia's 'Undesirables' Law Expected to Boost Media Self-Censorship {{!}} News|url=http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russias-undesirables-law-expected-to-boost-media-self-censorship/522228.html|access-date=2015-09-07}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Newspaper censors its own interview with Russian opposition leader, removing criticism of Putin and others|url=https://meduza.io/en/news/2015/09/07/newspaper-censors-its-own-interview-with-russian-opposition-leader-removing-criticism-of-putin-and-others|access-date=2015-09-07}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|date=Spring 2014|title=Coercion or Conformism? Censorship and Self- Censorship among Russian Media Personalities and Reporters in the 2010s|url=https://www.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%20archive/GWASHU_DEMO_22_2/Q0004344847N3648/Q0004344847N3648.pdf|journal=Demokratizatsiya}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Schimpfossl|first1=Elisabeth|last2=Yablokov|first2=Ilya|date=2014|title=Coercion or Conformism? Censorship and Self-Censorship among Russian Media Personalities and Reporters in the 2010s|url=http://publications.aston.ac.uk/id/eprint/31708/|journal=Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization|language=en|volume=22|issue=2|pages=295–311|issn=1074-6846}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Schimpfössl|first1=Elisabeth|last2=Yablokov|first2=Ilya|date=2020-02-01|title=Post-socialist self-censorship: Russia, Hungary and Latvia|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323119897797|journal=European Journal of Communication|language=en|volume=35|issue=1|pages=29–45|doi=10.1177/0267323119897797|s2cid=214256857|issn=0267-3231}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Bodrunova|first1=Svetlana S|last2=Litvinenko|first2=Anna|last3=Nigmatullina|first3=Kamilla|date=2020-08-03|title=Who is the censor? Self-censorship of Russian journalists in professional routines and social networking|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920941965|journal=Journalism|volume=22|issue=12|language=en|pages=2919–2937|doi=10.1177/1464884920941965|s2cid=225502997|issn=1464-8849}}</ref> === Turkey === Self-censorship has increased in Turkey as press freedoms declined under the [[Justice and Development Party (Turkey)|Justice and Development Party]] (AKP) government in the late 2000s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Yesil|first=Bilge|date=2014-06-01|title=Press Censorship in Turkey: Networks of State Power, Commercial Pressures, and Self-Censorship|url=https://doi.org/10.1111/cccr.12049|journal=Communication, Culture and Critique|volume=7|issue=2|pages=154–173|doi=10.1111/cccr.12049|issn=1753-9129}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Arsan|first=Esra|date=2013-09-01|title=Killing Me Softly with His Words: Censorship and Self-Censorship from the Perspective of Turkish Journalists|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/14683849.2013.833017|journal=Turkish Studies|volume=14|issue=3|pages=447–462|doi=10.1080/14683849.2013.833017|s2cid=146644682|issn=1468-3849}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Aktas|first1=Vezir|last2=Nilsson|first2=Marco|last3=Borell|first3=Klas|date=2019-04-03|title=Social scientists under threat: Resistance and self-censorship in Turkish academia|journal=British Journal of Educational Studies|volume=67|issue=2|pages=169–186|doi=10.1080/00071005.2018.1502872|issn=0007-1005|doi-access=free}}</ref> Affected areas include among others the discussion of the [[Armenian genocide]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Maksudyan|first=Nazan|date=2009-11-01|title=Walls of Silence: Translating the Armenian Genocide into Turkish and Self-Censorship|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/03017600903205781|journal=Critique|volume=37|issue=4|pages=635–649|doi=10.1080/03017600903205781|s2cid=143658586|issn=0301-7605}}</ref> ===United States=== According to [[AmeriSpeak]] survey, 40% of Americans did not feel free to speak their mind in 2019. About 60% of college students reported that they did not feel comfortable expressing their views of campus.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Jussim |first1=Lee |title=Why Americans Don't Feel Free to Speak Their Minds |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/rabble-rouser/202106/why-americans-dont-feel-free-speak-their-minds |access-date=23 December 2021 |publisher=Psychology Today |date=June 1, 2021}}</ref> ==See also== * [[Bradley effect]] * [[Chinese censorship abroad]] * [[Euphemism]] * [[Hawthorne effect]] *[[Information hazard]] * [[Clear Channel memorandum|List of songs deemed inappropriate by Clear Channel following the September 11, 2001 attacks]] * [[Media bias]] * [[Newspeak]] * [[OB marker]] * [[Overton window]] * [[Opinion corridor]] * [[Preference falsification]] * [[Political correctness]] * [[Social-desirability bias]] * [[Thought suppression]] == References == {{Reflist}} == External links == * {{Commons category-inline|Self-censorship}} {{-}} {{Censorship}} {{Media manipulation}} {{Authority control}} [[Category:Self-censorship| ]] [[Category:Conformity]] [[Category:Political correctness]]'