The ambition is of this volume to study the role censorship played in the intellectual culture of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, how it was implemented, and how it affected the development philosophy and literary writing. It contains contributions by intellectual historians, philosophers and literary theorists. The first section studies how Enlightenment thinkers were submitted to censorship, in particular the German Spinozists, Pierre Bayle, and the French Encylopedists. The second section on the institutional aspects of censorship contains an analysis of the breakdown of censorship in England around 1640 and a discussion of the impact of censorship on philosophy in the Netherlands. The final section studies the stand three Enlightenment thinkers, namely John Toland, Denis Diderot, and G. W. Leibniz, took on the issue of censorship.

This annotated document collection surveys the history and evolution of laws and attitudes regarding free speech and censorship in the United States, with a special emphasis on contemporary events and controversies related to the First Amendment. The United States' collective understanding of First Amendment freedoms was formed by more than 200 years of tensions between the power of word and the power of the government. During that time, major laws and legal decisions defined the circumstances and degree to which personal expression could be rightfully expressed-and rightfully limited. This struggle to define the parameters of free speech continues today. Vibrant and passionate debates about First Amendment limitations once inspired by the dissemination of birth control information now address such issues as kneeling during the national anthem, removing controversial books from public libraries, attempts by the Trump administration to discredit the press, and disseminating false or hateful information through social media platforms. By exploring diverse examples of censorship victories and triumphs of free expression, readers will better understand the enormous impact of First Amendment freedoms on American society. Chronological history of important milestones, documents, and events that have shaped the nation's understanding of freedom of speech/press and censorship, as well as the limitations of each Primary source selection that illuminates the importance of First Amendment freedoms as critical elements of democracy in the United States Informative, authoritative, and balanced introductory headnotes for each primary source to help readers understand the context in which they were created Readers Guide to Related Documents and sidebars

During World War I, the Catholic church blocked the distribution of government-sponsored V.D. prevention films, initiating an era of attempts by the church to censor the movie industry. This book is an entertaining and engrossing account of those efforts-how they evolved, what effect they had on the movie industry, and why they were eventually abandoned. Frank Walsh tells how the church's influence in Hollywood grew through the 1920s and reached its peak in the 1930s, when the film industry allowed Catholics to dictate the Production Code, which became the industry's self-censorship system, and the Legion of Decency was established by the church to blacklist any films it considered offensive. With the industry's Joe Breen, a Catholic layman, cutting movie scenes during production and the Legion of Decency threatening to ban movies after release, the Catholic church played a major role in determining what Americans saw and didn't see on the screen during Hollywood's Golden Age. Walsh provides fascinating details about the church's efforts to guard against anything it felt might corrupt moviegoers' morals: forcing Gypsy Rose Lee to change her screen name; investigating Frank Sinatra's fitness to play a priest in Miracle of the Bells; altering a dance sequence in Oklahoma; eliminating marital infidelity from Two-Faced Woman; compelling Howard Hughes to make 147 cuts in The Outlaw; blocking the distribution of Birth of a Baby; and attacking Asphalt Jungle for serving the "crooked purposes of the Soviet Union." However, notes Walsh, there were serious divisions within the church over film policy. Bishops feuded with one another over how best to deal with movie moguls, priests differed over whether attending a condemned film constituted a serious sin, and Legion of Decency reviewers disagreed over film evaluations. Walsh shows how the decline of the studio system, the rise of a new generation of better-educated Catholics, and changing social values gradually eroded the Legion's power, forcing the church eventually to terminate its efforts to control the type of film that Hollywood turned out. In an epilogue he relates this history of censorship to current efforts by Christian fundamentalists to end "sex, violence, filth, and profanity" in the media.

How has America censored British films? In this original, fascinating book, Anthony Slide answers this question, making full use for the first time of the recently opened US Production Code Administration files. Film by film from the 1930s through to the 1960s, he tells the inside story of the ongoing dialogue between the British film making industry and the American censors. The book shows graphically how the Production Code system operated, revealing how the censors viewed moral issues, violence, bad language and matters of decorum as well as revealing acute national differences, such as American concern over the British preoccupation with toilets. It also dispels myths, depicting chief censor Joseph Breen and his staff as knowledgeable people who sympathized with and admired the British film industry.

"Hurwitz surveys the types of expression that have been subject to censorship, repression, and punishment in the US. . . . This valuable reference work is highly recommended for all libraries." Choice

What rallies or inspires people to champion the different causes surrounding filtering or free expression? How do people vary in their views on what the First Amendment guarantees? This book encourages students to think critically about the pros and cons of censorship. The profiles of individuals who are active in free speech debates show that while there aren't always black and white answers, there are numerous ways to take a firm stand on the issues.

Readers will be introduced to a wide variety of people, from feminists arguing both sides of the debate over pornography, to those who believe no one can clearly define what is harmful and what is not. The book also presents people motivated by religious convictions to censor material they consider negative or detrimental. Fifty individual stories about activists on frontlines, fighting for what they believe, bring the controversies surrounding filtering and freedom of expression into sharp focus, offering a rich platform for consideration and debate.

From 1815 to 1914, European governments and their political oppositions were engaged in a constant "war" for the minds of the general population, especially the working classes. The German socialist newspaper, Hamburger Echo, declared on September 27, 1910, "In waging our war, we do not throw bombs. Instead we throw our newspapers amongst the masses of the working people. Printing ink is our explosive." The most comprehensive study ever published about European censorship practices during the 1815-1914 period, this book discusses the censorship of books, newspapers, caricatures, theater, and film through an analytical introductory survey and six chapters by leading specialists who summarize 19th-century censorship practices in the six major countries of continental Europe: Germany, Italy, France, Austria, Russia, and Spain. As a result of the massive transformation of European life in the post-Napoleonic period and the simultaneously rapid growth in industrialization, urbanization, literacy, transportation, and communication, the average European emerged quite suddenly as a potential player who could no longer be ignored by the ruling elite.

Presenting an overview of information control in America, this volume discusses why some works of art and literature are controversial, and examines the arguments of both those who advocate unlimited free speech and those who would impose some limits. Censorship in America discusses why many objects of art, literature, and popular culture are considered controversial, and examines the arguments of both sides. It explores the current wave of censorship in the form of political correctness and covers groundbreaking litigation and proposed legislation.

Why does the United States control the content of broadcast more strictly than it controls the content of print? In this provocative book, Matthew L. Spitzer explores the various rationales that support such different treatment and concludes that broadcast media should not be as strictly regulated as it is. Spitzer attacks the three most prevalent arguments in favor of broadcast control, utilizing insights from economics and social psychology and relating them to basic questions of First Amendment law and regulation of broadcasting. First, he shows that arguments centered on economic efficiency-such as those based on the supposed scarcity of the airwaves-can be applied equally to the print media. Next, responding to arguments that exposure to sexually explicit material encourages socially harmful conduct, he demonstrates that sexually explicit printed matter is at least as pernicious as broadcast erotica and that printed violence seems to have the same effects as broadcast violence. The third series of arguments-that broadcasting is more readily available to young children than is print-does have some validity, says Spitzer. However, we can shield children from exposure to broadcast material that may harm them by several methods: "zoning" broadcast violence and sexy by confining such matter to "adult" channels that can be received only by special receivers; allowing sex and violence to be broadcast only during the late night hours; and requiring television locks so that parents can monitor children's access to programming. According to Spitzer, there is not justification for censorship of indecent programming or for such regulations as the fairness doctrine or equal time for political candidates. His timely and spirited book makes a powerful case for changing national policy in this significant area.

In Media and Law: Between Free Speech and Censorship, Mathieu Deflem and Derek M.D Silva have gathered an interdisciplinary team of leading experts to make a valuable contribution to the existing literature. This volume explores free speech and the control thereof from both a political as well as cultural lens. These topics have once again moved center stage in scholarly as well as popular discussions on what must, should, and should not be said in the public sphere of ideas, opinions, and tastes. In a world of alternative facts, fake news, gender politics, company self-censorship, edited art, hate speech, and career-ending tweets, the chapters in this volume make a timely contribution.

On the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695, Thomas Macaulay wrote in his History of England, 'English literature was emancipated, and emancipated for ever, from the control of the government'. It's certainly true that the system of prior restraint enshrined in this Restoration measure was now at an end, at least for print. Yet the same cannot be said of government control, which came to operate instead by means of post-publication retribution, not pre-publication licensing, notably for the common-law offence of seditious libel. For many of the authors affected, from Defoe to Cobbett, this new regime was a greater constraint on expression than the old, not least for its alarming unpredictability, and for the spectacular punishment-the pillory-that was sometimes entailed. Yet we may also see the constraint as an energizing force. Throughout the eighteenth century and into the Romantic period, writers developed and refined ingenious techniques for communicating dissident or otherwise contentious meanings while rendering the meanings deniable. As a work of both history and criticism, this book traces the rise and fall of seditious libel prosecution, and with it the theatre of the pillory, while arguing that the period's characteristic forms of literary complexity-ambiguity, ellipsis, indirection, irony-may be traced to the persistence of censorship in the post-licensing world. The argument proceeds through case studies of major poets and prose writers including Dryden, Defoe, Pope, Fielding, Johnson, and Southey, and also calls attention to numerous little-known satires and libels across the extended period.

This resounding defence of the principles of free expression revisits the 'Satanic Verses' uproar of 1989, as well as subsequent incidents such as the Danish cartoons controversy, to argue that the human right of free speech is by no means so secure that it can be taken for granted.

A thorough exploration of an individual's right to bodily autonomy versus the state's power to regulate and control the bodies of its citizens. The Human Body on Trial asks the basic question: Who's in charge of your body-you or the authorities? Four narrative chapters examine key constitutional questions addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court over the past century concerning the power of the state to regulate the human body, placing the issues in historical context and examining the contemporary legal and medical knowledge that informed each decision. The book focuses on individual cases, such as Jacobson v. Massachusetts (compulsory vaccination), Buck v. Bell (forced sterilization), and Roe v. Wade (abortion), and discusses such controversial issues as AIDS testing and physician-assisted suicide. A special reference section includes court decisions and other primary documents. Timeline of major events in the evolution of the legal right of individual autonomy from the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868 to the 2002 ruling in State of Oregon and Peter Rasmussen, et al. v. John Ashcroft regarding implementing Oregon's Death with Dignity Act Excerpts from key legal documents from the Roe v. Wade (1973) decision to the lesser known Skinner v. Oklahoma (1942) ruling by the Supreme Court overturning the mandated sterilization for three-time offenders convicted of certain felonies

Theatre has often found itself at the centre of recent debates over censorship and the arts, as a result of coverage of events such as the protests against the play "Behzti" and the controversy over "Jerry Springer: The Opera." This book offers the first sustained study of censorship of the British stage from 1968 into the twenty-first century.

What happens to journalists who expose uncomfortable truths? How far are journalists prepared to go in order to report a difficult story? "Silenced" provides answers to these questions with the stories of journalists who risked their careers so that the public might be informed. From China, where Jasper Becker, formerly Beijing bureau chief of the South China Morning Post, fought a lonely and unsuccessful battle against owners willing to soften the newspaper's reporting of the Chinese government in the hope of protecting mainland investments, to Zimbabwe where the harsh treatment of the Guardian's Andrew Meldrum led to him being arrested and forcibly deported from the country because he dared criticise President Robert Mugabe, "Silenced" is a forcible reminder of the risks - both personal and financial - accepted by the media on our behalf. In other parts of the world, journalists face more traditional problems. When faced with the threat of censorship, all of these journalists reacted in a similar manner - they chose to report and face the consequences. They decided to place the ethics of journalism above all other considerations.;As such they are proof that press freedom cannot exist without those who are willing to uphold its fundamental principals. "Silenced" is more than a book on the media. It is an expression of the bravery and persistence of journalists everywhere.

Tracking the relationship between the theory of press control and the realities of practicing daily press censorship prior to publication, this volume on the suppression of dissent in early modern Europe tackles a topic with many elusive and under-researched characteristics. Pre-publication censorship was common in absolutist regimes in Catholic and Protestant countries alike, but how effective it was in practice remains open to debate. The Netherlands and England, where critical content segued into outright lampoonery, were unusual for hard-wired press freedoms that arose, respectively, from a highly competitive publishing industry and highly decentralized political institutions. These nations remained extraordinary exceptions to a rule that, for example in France, did not end until the revolution of 1789. Here, the author's European perspective provides a survey of the varying censorship regulations in European nations, as well as the shifting meanings of 'freedom of the press'. The analysis opens up fascinating insights, afforded by careful reading of primary archival sources, into the reactions of censors confronted with manuscripts by authors seeking permission to publish. Tortarolo sets the opinions on censorship of well-known writers, including Voltaire and Montesquieu, alongside the commentary of anonymous censors, allowing us to revisit some common views of eighteenth-century history. How far did these writers, their reasoning stiffened by Enlightenment values, promote dissident views of absolutist monarchies in Europe, and what insights did governments gain from censors' reports into the social tensions brewing under their rule? These questions will excite dedicated researchers, graduate students, and discerning lay readers alike.

The only thing Hollywood likes more than a good movie is a good deal. For more than fifty years producers and directors of war and action movies have been getting a great deal from America's armed forces by receiving access to billions of dollars worth of military equipment and personnel for little or no cost. Although this arrangement considerably lowers a film's budget, the cost in terms of intellectual freedom can be quite steep. In exchange for access to sophisticated military hardware and expertise, filmmakers must agree to censorship from the Pentagon.
As veteran Hollywood journalist David L. Robb shows in this revealing insider's look into Hollywood's "dirtiest little secret," the final product that moviegoers see at the theater is often not just what the director intends but also what the powers-that-be in the military want to project about America's armed forces. Sometimes the censor demands removal of just a few words; other times whole scenes must be scrapped or completely revised. What happens if a director refuses the requested changes? Robb quotes a Pentagon spokesman: "Well I'm taking my toys and I'm going home. I'm taking my tanks and my troops and my location, and I'm going home." That can be quite a persuasive threat to a filmmaker trying to keep his movie within budget.
Robb takes us behind the scenes during the making of many well-known movies. From The Right Stuff to Top Gun and even Lassie, the list of movies in which the Pentagon got its way is very long. Only when a director is determined to spend more money than necessary to make his own movie without interference, as in the case of Oliver Stone in the creation of Platoon or Francis Ford Coppola in Apocalypse Now, is a film released that presents the director's unalloyed vision.
For anyone who loves movies and cares about freedom of expression, Operation Hollywood is an engrossing, shocking, and very entertaining book.

The Soviet collapse of 1991 - the Great August liberation - demonstrated the total exhaustion of Marxist Leninist agitation and propaganda. It was no longer possible to live on slogans. The failure of Soviet agitprop is also the failure of Soviet censorship the latter being a unique institution in anti-thought. This volume analyzes the consequences of censorship, before tackling the media legislation of the Russian Federation and the dangers to the free flow of information emerging both within and outside the Russian Federation.

"When it comes to censorship in Hollywood, the bottom line is the ticket line. That's the central message in Jon Lewis's provocative and insightful investigation of the movie industry's history of self-regulation.a]Lewis shows that Hollywood films are a triumph of commerce over art, and that the film industry has consistently used internal censorship and government-industrial collusion to guarantee that its cash flow is never seriously threatened."
"-- The New York Times Book Review"

"a]an accomplished, comprehensive, and provocative new history of censorship and the American film industrya]And what of the perennial tussles between politicos and the film industry? All show business, suggests Lewis, make-believe veiling the real power structure that has nothing to do with morals, let alone art (it would be interesting to get his take on the recent marketing brouhaha and its relationship to the recent threatened actors and writers strikes). A staggering saga worthy itself of a Hollywood movie, Hollywood v. Hardcore is film history at its most illuminating and intense."
" --The Boston Phoenix"

"As provocative as his sometimes X-rated subject matter, film scholar Lewis detects an intimate relationship between the seemingly strange bedfellows of mainstream Hollywood cinema and hardcore pornography. From postal inspector Anthony Comstock to virtue maven William Bennett, from the Hays Office that monitored the golden age of Hollywood to the alphabet ratings system that labels the motion pictures in today's multiplex malls, Lewis's wry, informative, and always insightful study of American film censorship demonstrates that the most effective media surveillance happens before yousee the movie. Hollywood v. Hard Core is highly recommended for audiences of all ages."
"--Thomas Doherty, author of Pre-Code Hollywood"

"Jon Lewis weaves a compelling narrative of how box office needs-rather than moral strictures-have dictated the history of film regulation. Telling the complex and fascinating story of how Hollywood abandoned the Production Code and developed the ratings system and then telling the even more compelling story of how the X rating became a desirable marketing device when hard core pornography became popular, Hollywood v. Hard Core reveals a great deal about the true business of censorship."
"--Linda Williams, author of Hard Core: Power, Pleasure, and the "Frenzy of the Visible""

"This is a fascinating account, both entertaining and scholarly."
--"Journal of the West"

In 1972, "The Godfather" and "Deep Throat" were the two most popular films in the country. One, a major Hollywood studio production, the other an independently made "skin flick." At that moment, Jon Lewis asserts, the fate of the American film industry hung in the balance."

Spanning the 20th century, Hollywood v. Hard Core weaves a gripping tale of censorship and regulation. Since the industry's infancy, film producers and distributors have publicly regarded ratings codes as a necessary evil. Hollywood regulates itself, we have been told, to prevent the government from doing it for them. But Lewis argues that the studios self-regulate because they are convinced it is good for business, and that censorship codes and regulations are a crucial part of what binds the various competing agencies in the film business together.

Yet between 1968 and 1973 Hollywood films werefaltering at the box office, and the major studios were in deep trouble. Hollywood's principal competition came from a body of independently produced and distributed films--from foreign art house film "Last Tango in Paris" to hard-core pornography like "Behind the Green Door"--that were at once disreputable and, for a moment at least, irresistible, even chic. In response, Hollywood imposed the industry-wide MPAA film rating system (the origins of the G, PG, and R designations we have today) that pushed sexually explicit films outside the mainstream, and a series of Supreme Court decisions all but outlawed the theatrical exhibition of hard core pornographic films. Together, these events allowed Hollywood to consolidate its iron grip over what films got made and where they were shown, thus saving it from financial ruin.

The study of censorship is important not because we are shocked by the contents of a book or because a complaint about a work offends our sensibilities, but rather because this conflict between powerful opposing forces in society can threaten its foundations and ideals. Conflict exists because reasonable individuals in our society disagree as to what defines the limitations of creativity and expression, and who should decide when those boundaries ahve been overstepped. These issues are addressed in detail in this important and timely new survey.

By placing its professional expertise in the service of maintaining the democratic values of free expression and pluralism, American librarianship not only defended its professional autonomy in the area of book selection, but also developed an ideology of intellectual freedom and claimed its defense as a central jurisdiction. This volume charts the library profession's journey from the adoption of the 1939 Library's Bill of Rights to the 1969 development of the Freedom to Read Foundation. It identifies external events that posed threats to intellectual freedom and traces the ALA's response to those threats, particularly librarians' activities and discourse, and the motives and effectiveness of leaders responsible for forging the ALA's response.

Much of the data is drawn from the three most widely circulated library periodicals - "American Library Association Bulletin," "Wilson Library Bulletin," and "Library Journal" - that chronicle the debates that took place during the period. More importantly, the study makes extensive use of primary archival sources, state library journals, library school bulletins, and interviews. These sources reveal that by setting its professional expertise in the service of the democratic values of free expression and pluralism, American librarianship embarked on an odyssey of self-definition, through which it has carved out and defended its professional jurisdiction.

Trash or treasure is a wide-ranging historical study of the British circulation of the video nasties - a term that was originally coined to ban a group of horror videos in Britain in the 1980s but which continues to have cultural resonance in Britain up to the present day. The book is divided into three sections, which represent the key periods of existence of the nasties category - the formation of the term in the 1980s, the fan culture that formed around the nasties subsequent to their banning under the video recordings act and the DVD and theatrical re-release of some of the titles from 1990 onwards. Through an exploration of a range of relevant historical materials (from film reviews to fan websites, to video advertising materials) the book examines how this unusual, historically-specific genre category was formulated in a particular context, and then used (for different reasons) by moral campaigners, distributors, critics and fans. By examining the discourses that inform the circulation of a group of banned films (including the growth of DVD, the internet and the academic rehabilitation of horror films), the book argues that censorship is not just about rules and regulations, but also about the material, cultural and commercial consequences of a censorhsip act of law. It will be of great interest to lecturers and students of film, popular culture and the media, as well as enthusiasts of horror films and those interested in film censorship debates. -- .

The recent history of broadcasting on both sides of the Atlantic, characterized by a great increase in the number of services on offer to the public, has been brought about by technological advances and economic pressures. This has inevitably affected traditional forms of content regulation. The book explores the moral basis and history of such regulation as it has until now been applied to major issues of taste and decency. These include the protection of children, obscenity and bad language, offences against religious sensibility, `reality' television, and stereotyping. Deciding What we Watch? considers the different constraints (in the law, cultural customs, and self-regulation) affecting broadcasters in the two societies and the means by which they have responded to them. The book describes, with examples, the operations of compliance regulations and standard controls. It also looks at the impact of the First Amendment on American broadcasting in this area. It looks at the arguments for the practicality of maintaining appropriate forms of restraint into the future. Deciding What we Watch? poses the question of how divided and diverse societies decide what is permissible to broadcast and how the issue might continue to evolve in the future.

Modes of Censorship and Translation articulates a variety of scholarly and disciplinary perspectives and offers the reader access to the widening cultural debate on translation and censorship, including cross-national forms of cultural fertilization. It is a study of censorship and its patterns of operation across a range of disciplinary settings, from media to cultural and literary studies, engaging with often neglected genres and media such as radio, cinema and theatre. Adopting an interdisciplinary and transnational approach and bringing together contributions based on primary research which often draws on unpublished archival material, the volume analyzes the multi-faceted relationship between censorship and translation in different national contexts, including Italy, Spain, Great Britain, Greece, Nazi Germany and the GDR, focusing on the political, ideological and aesthetic implications of censorship, as well as the hermeneutic play fostered by any translational act. By offering innovative methodological interpretations and stimulating case studies, it proposes new readings of the operational modes of both censorship and translation. The essays gathered here challenge current notions of the accessibility of culture, whether in overtly ideological and politically repressive contexts, or in seemingly 'neutral' cultural scenarios.