![]() Censorship thus seems to have the oppositve of its stated intention. Slightly offensive or objectionable moments that the Censor Board might allow to pass (at least, until they receive a complaint) also form the basis of massive protest campaigns that themselves inflame religious tensions more than anything in the films themselves. Printed texts are censored quite rarely.) It is absurdly easy to get a film banned. (In other media-in print, for instance-it seems to me there is effective Freedom of Speech. ![]() Whether it does good or harm, the net effect of these restrictions is that the idea of freedom of speech in India is extremely limited when it comes to entertainment for the masses. Thus, even the religious sentiments of the films of the late 1990s - the Golden Years of Hindutva - were kept in check somewhat by the demands of the Censor Board. The Film Censor Board is famous for restricting displays of explicit sexuality in Indian films, but what is less known is that one of its primary responsibilities is the censoring of films that could inflame religious communalism. It is a Partition-era provision, and therefore quite understandable one could argue it has done as much good as harm over the years. ![]() But there are also clauses in the Indian Constitution (such as Article 25) which effectively cancel that right, because they allow the government to restrict speech that might inflame religious tensions. ![]() India is nominally a country with a Constitution guaranteeing Freedom of Speech ( Article 19).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |