Jump to content

Talk:Censorship in Denmark

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Child pornography

[edit]

I reverted two edits by User:87.59.76.136 containing the following text:

Additionally, the Internet is censored for any content deemed to be child pornography(sexual content involving persons under the age of 18). Attempting to access such pages in Denmark will result in a warning page notifying that that the content is illegal and has been censored according to § 235.<ref>Danish legislation on child pornography, [http://www.redbarnet.dk/Default.aspx?ID=1951]</ref><ref>Om blokeringsordningen mod børneporno, [http://www.politi.dk/da/borgerservice/boernepornofilter/om_blokering.htm]</ref><ref>Kritik af Dansk Internetcensur vers. 1.1, [http://itpol.polcast.dk/sager/censur/aftale]</ref>

I did so because I'm not convinced that this qualifies as censorship. It may, and it may even belong in the article, but being controversial, I think we need to discuss it here on the talkpage first. According to the article, censorship is not allowed in the form that anyone is free to express their "ideas in print, in writing, and in speech". Blocking child pornographic sites may or may not violate that, I'm not entirely sure that it does. But at least one of the sources the anonymous editor provided did call it censorship, so it would appear that there are some who believe that it does. However, Wikipedia should reflect all common aspects of an issue, so what is the general debate on this? I live in Denmark but I haven't really come across any media discussions on the topic. -Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • count) 18:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have not really noticed any kind of debate in Denmark about this either, even though I do agree that the way the blocking is carried out with no judicial authorities involved is very questionable. Wikinews and Wikileaks has an extensive coverage of this though. The quotes from Wikinews "can be used to censor anything" and claims "most sites on the list are still censored (i.e must be on the current list), even though many have clearly changed owners or were possibly even wrongly placed on the list." should be sufficient, but I am not aware whether Wikinews is an acceptable source in Wikipedia. --Saddhiyama (talk) 18:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should call it censorship. People usuallly think ALL censorship is bad, but I don't think that is the case. Just imagine if we walked around the street and we saw ads with explicit sex scenes? That would not be very cool... I'm glad that there is that kind of "censorship". I mean, heck, even wikipedia is censored (dispite claiming otherwise) it censors (at least) copyrighted material and child pornography. Just call it censorship... In my opinion, if you block ANY kind of information (even "bad" things like rape videos, murder videos, etc...), it is still censorship -- SF007 (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Hate speech ia also usually "censored" SF007 (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We need a solid definition of censorship then. The way I defined censorship is when content is forcible removed(in this case, both internet and books) before the public has a chance to see it. With this definition, it is censorship. But of course my definition may be wrong or inaccurate. PS: There was a debate but it quickly passed because most people despise child porn. There is no debate now. Personally I'm not sure if I'm for or against, I'm leaning towards against since it may spread to other areas(and it's unconstitutional) M99 87.59.76.136 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I'd very much like to know a precise definition of censorship. Does it only include political statements? Btw hate speech is not censored in Denmark as such, only punished. You can still post it but you will suffer the consequences, a kind of indirect censorship. M99 87.59.102.169 (talk)

Here is the lead from the Censorship article:
Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship. It occurs in a variety of different contexts including speech, books, music, films and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of reasons including national security, to control obscenity, child pornography, and hate speech, to protect children, to promote or restrict political or religious views, to prevent slander and libel, and to protect intellectual property. It may or may not be legal. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and it is frequently necessary to balance conflicting rights in order to determine what can and cannot be censored.
And the definition from Wiktionary:
censorship (cen‧sor‧ship) The use of state or group power to control freedom of expression, such as passing laws to prevent media from being published or propagated.
So, censorship is not limited to just political statements. And laws that prevent the publishing or viewing of child pornography are a form of censorship, although in most societies censoring child pornography would be considered acceptable or even desirable. And censorship can occur before (prior restraint) or after something is published.
--Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 00:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Censorship in Denmark/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
I've rated the article as a stub, as it contains very little information. There is no background information on the history of censorship in Denmark, e.g. it's use in historic times or it's use in war-times, most recently in World War II. In order to be fully complete, it should probably also contain something on the fact that some people believe that the fact that you are liable in a court of law for anything you say could be an infringement of freedom of speech (I'm not saying that it is, merely that some people think that way). Furthermore, there are no references in the article in its =Censorship_in_Denmark&oldid=229361974 current form. All in all, this only merits a stub-class. I've also rated it as low importance, as an article that isn't relevant to present day Denmark, and hasn't been for a while, seems to be able to be (or become) of higher importance. -Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • =Lilac+Soul&site=en.wikipedia.org count) 05:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 05:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 11:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Censorship_in_Denmark&oldid=1251477739"