We must not censor our entertainment industry

Note- This post is also published on The Huffington Post.

In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting, from across the spectrum of the gun control debate, various actors are challenging the entertainment industry's right to free speech. Representing Obama, Biden has met with industry representatives. NRA chief, Wayne LaPierre, has suggested that the industry bears the largest share of the blame for Sandy Hook. Most disappointingly however, major media contributors have also jumped on the anti-free speech bandwagon. These individuals apparently believe that they have the right to define appropriate programming for others.

Consider this argument by Ramin Setoodeh. Setoodeh arrogantly proclaims that because he was uncomfortable with the recent movie, Texas Chainsaw 3D, ".... gore at the movies just doesn’t feel entertaining". Therefore, he argues, Hollywood must abandon this genre. Except, as indicated by Chainsaw's box office takings, many others obviously thought the opposite. For me, this is the crux of the issue. While individually, we might not always agree with its products, our entertainment industry is nonetheless at the heart of what America is all about. Not just in terms of its vigorous manifestation of free speech, but also, in terms of how this 'freedom to create' interacts with broader notions of American capitalism. Put simply, the fundamental truth is that the success of movies/video games resides upon their consumer desirability. While the First Amendment essentially assures that government cannot impose excessive legal restrictions on speech, my great concern is that further pressure from various actors could fuel an already present (see South Park) condition of self-censorship in the entertainment industry. This would be a disaster. Such a dynamic would not only assert the authoritarian moral judgments of the few, in preference to the majority opinions of society, it would also encourage a slippery slope towards greater future censorship. In essence, the question would be asked, if violence is to be divorced from entertainment, then why not also the presentation of drugs (for the children's sake)?, or sex (let's stop STDs)?, or religion (we can't risk inflaming violence)? etc. The precedent would be set and the following consequences would be clear: A thought police society locked in the despair of a creative, emotional and intellectual prison. 

Just look at Europe for an example of what happens when political correctness takes root. 

I'm not being alarmist. Today, censorship sympathizers are sadly a mainstream occurrence (see my response - it's the first comment after the op/ed).
 

No one should deny that the Sandy Hook massacre was a tragedy of terrible proportion. I freely agree, as a country - republicans, democrats and independents alike, we need to work together to reduce the risks of future atrocities. But when it comes to the entertainment industry, the correct course of action is obvious. Parents should exert greater control over the entertainment choices of their children and adults should ignore products which offend their moral values. It's incredibly important that we remember, without controversial speech, America would not have been born and slavery might have longer endured.  

In it's ability to drive debate forwards, often in unpredictable ways, controversy can be an incredible force for good. Because of its polluting influence, content based censorship of America's entertainment industry must be avoided at all costs.

South Park creators, Matt Stone and Trey Parker discussing censorship (comment at 5.10 is especially important)

Syrian Rebel Victory - Taftanaz, US Entertainment Industry and Free Speech

1) Syrian rebels have seized a major Assad air base in the north of the country. Their victory (assuming they are able to hold the base) represents another step towards Assad's ultimate defeat. In specific terms, the capture of the Taftanaz base offers a number of key strategic opportunities for the rebels. First, being proximate to Aleppo (about 15 miles), the facility provides a forward operating base from which the rebels can now launch operations against government forces in that city. In addition, Taftanaz is located next to the main Syrian M45 highway (have a look on google maps) or in military terms, MSR. As such, the base also offers the rebels the prospect to dominate the direct route south to Hamah, Homs and ultimately Damascus. Finally, the capture imposes another psychological blow on the Syrian regime. Apparently the Syrian Army abandoned its position during the battle for Taftanaz. This does not inspire confidence in the regime's ability to motivate its forces. (Though the regime's elite units are ideologically conjoined to Assad).

            What can we expect now? For one, further government defections in the coming weeks. Also, increasing desperation by Assad and his allies in the Lebanese Hizballah and Iran (and Russia). On the Iran/Hizballah front, it's possible these two might attempt to create an incident that distracts international attention away from Assad. One note of caution however, the group that seized Taftanaz subscribes to a Sunni extremist ideology and is regarded by the US/EU as a terrorist group. One of the reasons why I support arming Syrian rebel nationalists, is so that these elements can counter-balance the extremists. Both now and after Assad is gone. We do not want a 2006 Iraq style sectarian bloodletting in post-Assad Syria.

2) The news that entertainment groups are meeting with VP Biden's gun control task force concerns me. The Federal Government has no place pressuring the movie/tv/gaming industry to self-regulate the content of their products. The entertainment industry caters to demand - if people don't like a movie or a computer game, then they won't purchase access to that product. Fortunately, we have the First Amendment. We must ensure that we don't follow the European route of limited free speech.