Censorship of Media: Comparing Practices in Australia and China

This essay provides a comparative analysis of media censorship practices in Australia and China. It begins by defining media censorship and highlighting its historical context, referencing Jim Morrison's quote about media control. The essay then contrasts Australia's relatively liberal approach to media freedom, emphasizing its constitutional protections and the role of government bodies in overseeing media content, with China's stringent control under the Communist Party. It discusses specific examples of censorship in China, including punishments for journalists and the blocking of websites. The essay also acknowledges instances of censorship in Australia, such as restrictions on reporting certain activities. The conclusion underscores the importance of media freedom and summarizes the key differences in censorship levels between the two countries. The references section includes various academic sources and news articles supporting the analysis.

Running head: MEDIA CENSORSHIP
Media Censorship
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1MEDIA CENSORSHIP
Introduction
“Whoever controls the media, controls the mind.”
The above quoted lines of Jim Morrison from “An America Prayer” clearly indicate
the power which the media holds in the present world. Therefore, it is often seen that there is
an initiative on the part of the various entities in a nation to control as well as the censor the
media. The “censorship of media” can be defined as the process by means of which the
powers of the media are curtailed down and its duty to report the news to the public with
absolute honesty is usurped (Vivian and Maurin 2012). This is often done with the objective
to keep the actual news or information from being conveyed to the people, which might
portray the authorities in the negative light. It is to be noted that that the process is a very
ancient one and several books and other literary pieces were censor by the throne of England
in the traditional times. John Milton, the famous Puritan poet protested against the process of
censorship in his famous tract “Areopagitica”, published in the year 1644, in lines like “Give
me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all
liberties” (Vivian and Maurin 2012). This essay intends to study the process of “censorship of
media” in the two countries of Australia and China. This is the thesis statement of this
particular essay.
Discussion
Australia stands on the 18th position whereas China stands on the 88th position on the list of
countries with the most liberal policies towards the media (Butler and Rodrick 2017). The
nation of Australia, being a commonwealth, provides the “freedom of expression” to its
citizens and thereby ensures the “freedom of press” (Butler and Rodrick 2017). The nation of
China, on the other hand, is controlled by the Communist Party of China and all the apparatus
of the State like media, rival political parties are controlled by the ruling party itself (Tai

2MEDIA CENSORSHIP
2014). Therefore, not only the “freedom of expression” of the people is usurped but the
“freedom of press” is also grossly misappropriated (Yang 2012). Commenting on the
importance of the free media, George Washington said, “If freedom of speech is taken away,
then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter” (Vivian and Maurin 2012).
Therefore, the presence of a free as well as uncensored media is very essential for a nation.
The Chinese government has complete control over the functioning of its media, the
publication of books, newspapers and other sources of information (Yang 2012). The
Communist Party of China have declared a punishment of up to 12 years for the whistle
blowers and 6 years for the journalists who try to portray a negative image of the ruling Party
(Bamman, O'Connor and Smith 2012). It is also to be noted that recently several journalists
were imprisoned for reporting against the government under the reign of the President Xi
Jinping. In another instance, in Macau, the journalists and media personnels were subjected to
actual torture for carrying out their duties (Tai 2014). The process of “censorship of media”
reached to an all time with the introduction of the new SAPPRFT (Tai 2014). According to
this new regulation the media personnels and journalists are not allowed to portray the
governmental authorities in the new light and also not supposed to reveal information which
might prove detrimental to the interests of the ruling government (Tai 2014). Several
journalists were exiled and subjected to inhuman tortures for revealing the atrocities
committed by the police and political figures like Leung Chun-Yin (Bamman, O'Connor and
Smith 2012). Another interesting fact to note about the “censorship of media” in China is that
one in four website which are easily accessible through the search engine Google has been
blocked by the government of China through their filtering process (Curtin 2012). The total
number of websites blocked by the Chinese government is around 923 and more than 26%
citizens of China have been affected by this censorship (Curtin 2012). Thus, it can be said
that the Communist Party of China governs the nation of China just like a dictator would rule

3MEDIA CENSORSHIP
his or her state. Thus, the media as well as the citizens of the nation are deprived of their
basic rights like “freedom of expression”, “right to information”, “freedom of press” and
various others which are in-congenial for the blossoming of democratic and republican nation
(Yang 2012).
The Australian government, on the other hand, does not have such a stringent hold over
the media of their nation (Vivian and Maurin 2012). The government of Australia, in
comparison to the government of China, is quiet liberal in their attitude towards to the media
of their land. In the commonwealth nation of Australia, the power to censor the media is
vested with the state as well as the federal government, where the federal government can
make laws relating the media communication and the kind of news which is being
broadcasted or printed (Butler and Rodrick 2017). The state government oversees the sale as
the broadcast of the printed items, including the newspapers, books and others and also the
various digital platforms through which information is being conveyed to the people (Butler
and Rodrick 2017). It is interesting to note that the earliest instance of “censorship of media”
in Australia was the censorship of the book “Lady Chatterley's Lover” by D.H. Lawrence in
the year 1929 (Butler and Rodrick 2017). The ‘Australian Classification Board (ACB)”
formed in the year 1970 oversees the censorship of movies and other digital means through
which information can be conveyed to the people just like the Communist Party of China
(Vivian and Maurin 2012). Along with that, the “Australian Communications and Media
Authority”, also oversees the work of censorship of the media (Vivian and Maurin 2012). In
Australia, in the recent times, there have been several instances where the journalists have
been reprimanded for representing the truth just like the journalists in China. The Australian
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull himself said “the role of journalists was to stand up to the
powerful, adding that our democracy ‘depends vitally on a free and courageous press who are
not cowed by governments and by big vested interests’” (Butler and Rodrick 2017).

4MEDIA CENSORSHIP
However, there are certain respects in which the “censorship of media” in both the countries
is almost similar. For example, in Australia, several journalists were convicted when they
tried to report the inhumanities conducted during one of the anti-terrorism raids of the
“special intelligence operations” (SIOs) (McGowan 2018). It is also interesting to note that
just the Chinese government, the Australian government has a rule that if a journalist reports
on such activities then he or she will be imprisoned for around 12 years (Walkleys.com.
2018). Another interesting fact to note is that as many as 9 journalists have been killed in
Australia in the past 42 years and not a single person has being punished for their death
(Walkleys.com. 2018).
Conclusion
Therefore, from the above discussion it becomes clear that freedom is one of the most
important aspects of the media of any nation. The above study clearly indicates that in both
the countries of Australia and China, the media is subjected to censorship. The process of
“censorship of media” is lesser in Australia in comparison to the nation of China, where the
power of the media is completely curtailed down. It is important to note that the ‘censorship
of media’ can be seen as the repression of the fundamental rights like “freedom of
expression”, “right to information”, and other basic rights of the people.

5MEDIA CENSORSHIP
References
Bamman, D., O'Connor, B. and Smith, N., 2012. Censorship and deletion practices in
Chinese social media. First Monday, 17(3).
Butler, D.A. and Rodrick, S., 2017. Australian media law. Thomson Reuters (Professional)
Australia Limited.
Curtin, M., 2012. Chinese media and globalization. Chinese Journal of Communication, 5(1),
pp.1-9.
McGowan, M. 2018. UN warns Australia against imposing 'draconian penalties' on
journalists. [online] the Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-
news/2018/feb/20/un-warns-australia-against-imposing-draconian-penalties-on-journalists
[Accessed 4 Mar. 2018].
Tai, Q., 2014. China's media censorship: A dynamic and diversified regime. Journal of East
Asian Studies, 14(2), pp.185-210.
Vivian, J. and Maurin, P.J., 2012. The media of mass communication. Pearson Canada.
Walkleys.com. 2018. Press freedom is under attack, not least in Australia « The Walkley
Foundation. [online] Available at: http://www.walkleys.com/press-freedom-is-under-attack-
not-least-in-australia/ [Accessed 4 Mar. 2018].
Yang, A., 2012. Understanding the Changing Chinese Media: Through the Lens of
Crises. China Media Research, 8(2).