Hi, I'm Mrs Allchin, and I'm going to be taking you through this citizenship lesson.

I'm going to provide you with all the information that you need and I'll be telling you when you need to pause and complete activities or carry out some tips for understanding.

Hope you enjoy the lesson.

This lesson is called "Should the media ever be censored?" and it's taken from the unit, "How does the media hold those in power to account?" By the end of this lesson, you will be able to to describe what censorship is and explain its positives and its negatives.

These are the key words for today's lesson.

Censorship, which is the control of information or ideas within a society; media, which is television, radio, printed, and new media, which can reach a large number of people; and inconvenient, which is something that's causing difficulty, trouble, or discomfort, often by disrupting plans or making things less easy.

This is our lesson outline for today for the lesson, "Should the media ever be censored?" So, we're going to look at what is censorship.

We're then going to move on to look at should the media ever be censored in a democracy? And then we're going to do a comparison and we're going to look at how is media censorship different in China? And we're gonna start with what is censorship? So, censorship is a suppression of speech, public communication, or other information on the basis that such material is considered offensive, harmful, sensitive or inconvenient.

So, it's when it's suppressed, it's held back.

So Izzy is saying, "Ooh, that's a pretty big definition.

"Can you break it down for me?" So, have a go yourself if you like.

Pause the video and try and see if you can come up with a simpler, easy-to-understand definition of censorship.

And Aisha is saying, "Censorship is when certain information "is not allowed to be printed "because it's harmful in some way." So, censorship is ultimately when the decision is made to stop certain information from being released.

Let's have a quick check.

What are the missing words? Censorship is a suppression of speech, public communication, or other information on the basis that such material is considered something, harmful, something or inconvenient.

Pause while you have a go.

And the first missing word was offensive and the second missing word is sensitive.

So, Izzy is asking, "What might count as offensive information?" So if you like, pause and have a think about this yourself.

So, information that would offend and anger people is what we would class as offensive information.

So, it's information that if someone was to hear that or read that, they'd be really offended.

They'd feel really angry about that.

They'd have quite an emotive reaction.

An example of this is in 2013, the comedian Frankie Boyle had his whole act cut from a BBC programme because his jokes were viewed by many as too offensive.

So, Frankie Boyle is a comedian who puts on shows with the aim of trying to make people laugh.

But some of his jokes were seen as very offensive because often they referred to people from marginalised groups.

So as a result, it was decided that his whole comedian act would not be shown on the BBC.

So, this is an example of censorship.

His act was censored because the information was seen as being offensive.

So Izzy's asking now, "Well, what might count as sensitive information?" So slightly different, similar but slightly different.

So, what do you think? What might count as sensitive information? Pause and have a think yourselves if you like.

So, if we think about the word sensitive and we link that to the word upset and being sad and feeling upset, potentially even being a little bit traumatised.

So, sensitive information is information that would upset people because of its emotive nature.

It's going to be really upsetting.

A really famous example of this is in 1997 when Princess Diana died, there was an official restriction of documents relating to her death as they were viewed as too sensitive for public release.

So, she lost her life in a car crash.

So there would've been lots of information potentially available from the media, but the decision was made that that would actually be restricted information about her death would be restricted 'cause it would be seen as too sensitive and too upsetting to the public to be released.

So, this is another example of censorship, this time because of sensitive information.

So now Izzy's asking, "Well, what might count as harmful information?" So, this one is slightly different to the two examples we've looked at already.

So, pause and have a go.

So, it is literally what the word says.

So, it's information that could cause harm and danger to others if it was released.

So, it's information that's seen as actually being quite dangerous if it was to be released.

This for example, that would be internet service providers blocking extremist content to prevent radicalization.

So, internet service providers will often use artificial intelligence to be able to kind of hunt down and find content that could be viewed as extremist and if they find it, they can stop that from being released.

So again, that's another example of censorship, this time to try and stop people having access to harmful information.

So, let's have a quick check then.

So, let's try and match the term to the correct examples.

So, we've got offensive, sensitive, and harmful.

They're the three types of information that we've looked at so far, and you need to try and match it to why it might be censored.

So, pause while you have a go at this check.

So, offensive because it could offend people, it could anger people.

Sensitive because it could upset people, it could make them feel really emotive, really sad, really traumatised.

And harmful is that it could could be dangerous, it could literally cause harm to other people.

So, this is one that's a little bit different because information can also be censored for inconvenience.

So, information that is censored for inconvenience is different, whereas information that is censored due to it being offensive, sensitive, or harmful is done to protect the public.

Censorship for inconvenience can also be viewed as occurring, so that the information doesn't challenge authority, expose big mistakes, which could make people or organisations look incompetent or embarrass people or organisations in power.

And this is why this type of censorship is a little bit more- can be a little bit more controversial for some people.

So Aisha's asking, "Are there any examples of information "that is censored for inconvenience in the UK?" So, pause if you want to have a little bit of a think yourself.

So, the UK government issues a Defence and Security Media Advisory long title there, the DSMA.

And that's a notice that can advise, but the key word here is it can't enforce because we've got a free press, but it can advise, strongly advise the media from reporting on specific topics, often relating to national security.

And although that's only advised, not enforced, the vast majority of media platforms would sort of agree to that and they would stop that information getting out or going to print.

So however, some people believe that information censored isn't always about national security and is instead about hiding government mistakes and preventing embarrassment.

So, this is why this one is a little bit more controversial for some.

It's one for citizenship- it's a really good one to think critically about because on the one hand, the government might say, "Well no, this information if released "could be quite sensitive, "it could impact national security.

"Citizens don't need to know that.

"It's sort of quite private government information." But on the other hand, some people might say, "Well actually wait a minute, "why are they trying to hide it? "Are they just trying to hide it for their own benefit?" So, there's very much two sides to this coin.

So, let's have a look at some examples where information has been censored.

So, after the Grenfell Tower fire in 2017, which was an absolutely horrific fire where many, many people lost their lives, certain government reports as well as communications about fire safety regulations between different people and warnings about warning about the building and how it could potentially be unsafe that took place before the disaster were not made public.

So, lots of people viewed this as a story that was very much in the public interest because what happened at Grenfell, there was a risk that that could potentially happen in other places that had a similar building structure.

So therefore, some people felt that was wrong, that the government held back and didn't release certain bits of information that were made public, whereas the government would say that was sensitive information, that it was private information that didn't need to be released.

Another example is during the coronavirus pandemic, the media was slow to publish contracts for PPE.

So, that was the personal protective equipment like your masks and things, and investigations later revealed that some PPE contracts were awarded without proper checks and balances.

So again, on the one hand, governments saying, "Well actually that it's government information." And on the other hand people were saying, "Well the reason they didn't release it "was because actually lots of of money "and big contracts were given "without proper checks and balances." So in these cases, some people argue that the information was censored to prevent government embarrassment, rather than citizen safety.

So, true or false? Censorship for inconvenience is viewed in the same way as other types of censorship.

So, is that true? Is that false? And can you tell me why? It's false.

Why? Information that is censored due to being offensive, sensitive, or harmful is always viewed to be done to protect the public, whereas censorship for inconvenience can be seen as occurring, so that information doesn't challenge or embarrass those in power or expose mistakes.

So for task A, I would like you for each type of censorship below to provide a statement that agrees and a statement that disagrees with a reason for censorship.

So you've got offensive information, sensitive information, harmful information and inconvenience, so you might want to go back and just remind yourselves what they mean.

So for each of them, you need to say a reason why someone might agree and a reason why someone might disagree with that type of censorship.

And I've put some sentence starts there that might help you.

So you could put, it could be argued that offensive information should be censored because.

On the other hand, it could be argued that it shouldn't be censored because.

So, pause while you have a go at this task.

So, these are some of the things that your answers might have included.

So, it could be argued that offensive information should be censored because it offends people and could make them angry and cause unrest.

On the other hand, it could be argued that it shouldn't be censored because different people are offended by different things and some may see others as too easily offended.

It could be argued that sensitive information should be censored because we have a duty to respect the feelings of others and not cause them emotional distress.

On the other hand, it could be argued that it shouldn't be censored because people have the choice not to read the information.

It could be argued that harmful information should be censored because it has the potential to cause real harm and danger to citizens.

On the other hand, it could be argued that it shouldn't be censored because people can still critically evaluate this information and make up their own minds.

It could be argued that censorship for inconvenience should be allowed because those in power need to be trusted when making a decision, which is for the country's best interests.

On the other hand, it could be argued that it shouldn't be censored because with power comes responsibility and the need for transparency, and citizens have a right to know what is going on.

So, we're now going to move on to looking at, should the media ever be censored in a democracy? So Lucas is saying, "What does democracy mean again?" So, just pause and have a think and remind yourself what does the word democracy mean? So, democracy is when citizens can take part in the government of their own country, which includes being able to take part in free and fair elections to vote for people to represent them in parliament.

And the media plays a really important role in the democracy as it provides citizens with the information needed to make informed decisions.

It can also hold politicians to account.

And there is an article dedicated to the importance of information within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

So Article 19, within this declaration states: 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.

So, what that's basically saying is you can have an opinion without interference or without people trying to pressure you to think a certain way, so you're free to make up your own opinion.

You can see, so you can find information, you can receive information, and you can impart, so give information away.

And that's through any media.

So, you should be able to access that through a range of different media sources and regardless of frontiers, which basically means regardless of what country you're in.

So, you should be able to find out that information regardless of where you live and where that information is stored.

So, it's about that real freedom of information, and opinion, and expression, all of those really important human rights.

So, the key characteristics of the media in a democracy are that it's free.

And what that means is- not about free from a money point of view, but it's free from interference from the government.

So, we've got a free press in this country, that means that the media is not owned by the government and therefore it's free from interference from government.

It should be transparent.

And you think something that's transparent is clear and that means that there's that clarity about how they operate and who owns them.

Accountable, meaning that it should take responsibility for its actions, okay? So, the media should take responsibility for their actions and that includes making it clear and retracting things when they've made a mistake.

And it should absolutely in a democracy be regulated.

So, there should be checks and balances on the media, so that we know that we can trust it and that the information is accurate.

So, let's have a check.

Match the key characteristic of the media within a democracy to its definition.

So, pause while you have a go at trying to match up the that column on the left with the column on the right.

Let's see if you've got these right.

So free, being free from interference from the government.

Transparent.

So transparency, so about that clarity, it's clear about how they operate and who owns them.

Accountable, that they take responsibility for their actions.

And regulated, that there are checks and balances.

The media might sometimes need to be censored to protect our democracy.

So for example, to protect the integrity of a trial, so that a fair trial can take place; to protect national security; to uphold democratic values; to stop unacceptable intrusion into people's private lives, so to make sure there's that clear barrier there; to prevent the publication of misinformation, disinformation, and malformation; and to allow media self-censorship.

And that's through the Independent Press Standards Organisation where certain things might be decided not to be released.

So Lucas is asking, "Are there any examples "of the media being censored within a democracy?" So, have a think yourself.

Do you know of any examples? Have you heard of any examples? So, this was mentioned on the previous slide.

So, publicity around legal proceedings can influence public opinion and the jury, and jurors themselves.

And this can threaten the defendant's right to a fair trial.

So, this is an example of censorship that happens to uphold our democratic values that happens to uphold our democratic values because the right to a fair trial is a clear value in a democracy and there's actually a law.

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 restricts reporting during active trials to prevent prejudice and information from being released and reducing the risk of public opinion being influenced.

Because how our court systems work at crown court level Because how our court systems work at crown court level is that you do have a jury, you know, you do have a group of people that are ultimately deciding on guilt and therefore if there's lots of information going out in the media that could include misinformation, and disinformation, and malformation, then actually that could really, really damage the person's right to access a fair trial.

So, this is an example of a type of censorship but it's actually done to uphold other democratic values like the right to a fair trial.

The media's right to publish must be balanced against individuals' rights to privacy as well.

So again, this is where you've got that balance of rights.

So media intrusion, particularly in cases involving grief, trauma, or scandal, goes against these rights.

So you know, these are real people that have suffered potentially some harrowing life events and therefore media intrusion would actually go against their right to privacy.

An example of this is the phone-hacking scandal, which was in 2011.

And this led to significant legal and ethical debates about media limits.

And as a result of this, there was a Leveson Inquiry, which recommended stronger regulations to prevent unbalanced media intrusion.

So, this is where actually that that right to privacy was absolutely gone against.

And it was found that some journalists were actually hacking into people's personal mobile phones, reading text messages, listening to voicemails, and then using this information to ultimately print stories about them, which is absolutely and massively goes against their right to privacy, so this is quite a landmark case in terms of looking at those rights that the people have within a democracy.

And the media follows self-regulatory guidelines, one example being the Independent Press Standards Organisation, IPSO.

And this ensures journalism is responsible.

So, that is that organisation that really checks and regulates what is happening within the media.

An example of something that they have in their guidelines, an IPSO guideline relates to the reporting about children.

So in this case, consent from parents or carers is needed before photographing or interviewing children under the age of 16.

And this is why sometimes you might find in newspapers and things like that, if there's a photo where there is children, their faces have been pixelated and that is because of these guidelines from IPSO.

So, consent is needed as well as interviewing children under the age of 16 as well, consent would be needed.

They cannot be identified in reports relating to sexual assault and their right to privacy must be respected and they must not be exploited.

So, that's really important as well, that idea that actually younger children might say things they wouldn't normally say or open up to people they might not normally open up to, they cannot be exploited because of their age.

So, let's have a check.

What does IPSO state about the reporting of children? They must not be interviewed, ever? They can be interviewed if they give consent, or they can be interviewed with parent or carer consent? And it's C, they can be interviewed with parent or carer consent.

Let's have another check.

Which is not an example of media censorship to support democracy? And it's B, limiting what can be printed about the Prime Minister's actions is not an example of media censorship to support democracy.

So for task B, I'd like you to write one paragraph to explain why the media may sometimes be censored in a democracy.

And you've got some words here to help you.

So, you could use the words democracy, trial, misinformation, freedom, government, and value.

So, those words might help you to structure your paragraph.

So, pause while you have a go at this task.

So, you may have written, the freedom of the press is seen as one of the core values in a democracy.

This is because the media's role is to keep the public informed and hold those in power to account.

However, it could be said that there are times when the media should be censored.

The government might want to censor information published by the media if it is in the interest of national security.

It could be important to censor information published about a criminal case, so it ensures that a fair trial can take place.

Sometimes the media might use self-censorship, for example, to stop the spread of misinformation.

We're now going to move onto the final part of the lesson where we're going to do a bit of a comparison.

So, we're going to look at, how is media censorship different in China? So first of all, it's probably a good idea for you to have a little bit of an understanding about governance in China.

So, the government in China is controlled by the Communist Party of China.

China does actually have eight legally recognised political parties, but unlike political parties in Western democracy, so in a democracy like ours, they are not allowed to challenge the Communist Party's hold on power.

So therefore, in reality, China can be referred to as a one party state.

And this is different to the UK where political parties challenge each other openly, so we do have different political parties and they do challenge each other openly.

Absolutely.

So, let's have a quick check.

China is referred to as a, is it A: no party state, B: one party state or C: two party state? And it's B: one party state.

So, the lack of choice around the country's ruling party is one of the main reasons why China is not considered to be a democracy.

In the UK, citizens have a choice in who they vote for and political parties losing, gaining, or reclaiming political seats is a normal part of our democracy.

And we saw this in the last election.

It's a really common thing for MPs to have a seat for a while, then they might lose that seat.

That seat might end up going to a different political party, that's really, really normal in the UK.

China is also known for its really high levels of censorship and information control.

So, China's government has core values that can be seen as harmful to democracy and press freedom, despite the Chinese Constitution stating that "Citizens of the People's Republic of China "enjoy freedom of speech of the press, "and of assembly, and of demonstration." So, there's a bit of a contradiction there.

The president of China has spoken out about his expectations of the media to speak for the Communist Party's will and to align their political thinking and deeds to that of the parties.

So, very, very different to the UK that's actually coming out and saying that there's an expectation that the media in China is absolutely fully supportive of the governance of China.

So, let's have a check.

The president of China expects the media to.

Is it A: speak for the Communist Party? B: speak against the Communist Party? Or C: speak as they choose about the Communist Party? And it's A: speak for the Communist Party.

So Sam is asking, "Can journalists still speak out in China?" Pause and have a think yourself if you want, but what do you think the answer is to this question? So, foreign journalists actually face severe restrictions when trying to report from China.

And journalists who step out of line can face harsh consequences.

And according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, at the end of 2023, China had 44 journalists in prison, more than any other nation.

So Sam is saying, "So do Chinese citizens "get a lot of their information "from social media and the internet?" What do you think? In China, there is limited access to social media platforms and international search engines, and this is sometimes referred to as "the Great Firewall." So, that idea that it's really, really difficult to be able to access social media platforms and those international search engines.

And furthermore, major international internet platforms are banned and domestic alternatives are strictly monitored, and government critical information is removed and artificial intelligence is used to monitor citizens' online behaviour.

So, this means that there's that really carefully curated internet information where anything that's remotely critical of the government is ultimately removed.

So, citizens are unable to see that balanced viewpoint about their government.

So, true or false? Chinese citizens have similar online rights to UK citizens? So tell me, is that true, false, and why? It's false.

Why? International internet search engines are banned and domestic search engines are monitored and social media is restricted.

So, for task C, I want you to compare media censorship in China with media censorship in the UK.

You may wish to pick three points about media censorship in China and compare each one with the UK.

So, here is a starter sentence to help you.

In the UK,.

this is different to China because.

So, pause while you have a go at this task.

So, your three points may have looked something like this.

So, in the UK, the media is free to print negative stories about the government; this is different to China because any negative stories about their government are taken down.

In the UK, citizens are free to access information via international internet platforms; this is different to China because these are banned and domestic sites are closely monitored; In the UK, political parties freely go against each other and the media print stories about all of them; this is different to China because power is restricted to one party and the media is expected to be positive about this party.

So, in summary for the lesson, "Should the media ever be censored?", censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information on the basis that such material is considered offensive, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient.

Although media supports democracy, the media might sometimes need to be censored to protect democracy and democratic values.

For example, not reporting on active court cases to ensure people can get a fair trial.

Media censorship looks different in other countries.

For instance, China has high levels of censorship and the media is tightly controlled by the government there.

Well done for working so hard during this lesson! I hope you enjoyed it and that you'll be coming back for more citizenship lessons in the future.