joydeep The given issue states that,censorship is rarely,if ever, justified.

Censorship is a kind of legal rule by virtue of which the ruler or the govenrmen t restricts its people from viewing or listening something.I take a modearate stan d on this issue. Censorship is seldom good for the soceity.It restricts us from viewing or listen ing something bad. Envy scene or adult scene impacts negetively on children. So in t his case it would help children. Psycologists prove it by experiment,where three gro ups of children were shown three types of movies: more envy,less envy and with out e nvy. And after that they are exposed to an almost similar typer of situation.The chil dren, who were shown more envy movies reacted to the given situation more spitely than the others.So sometimes it helps to grow our moral values. Censorship helps to keep social and communal harmony. Someone might say,people s hould have the right to express their views. Ofcourse they have but without hurting an yone or any community. For example M.F.Hussians nude painting of Goddess Saraswati hu rted the Hindus or the movie "The Vinchi Code" hurts the Christians.Also "Satanic Ver ses" of Salman Rushdi hurts the Muslims.So in a multi-communal country like India, Uk or in the USA, censorship is justified in this regard. But there are negetive impacts of censorship.It restricts us to know the real pi cture of a country.Like in Syria,due to the censorship on news media, we are not able to recieve the proper news of annihilation by Asad government. Also in some countries like China, gmail is even censored. In India,the "emergency" rule imposed by Indira Gandhi in 1975 was not justified because it killed the voice o f democracy like the British rulers did it in unidependent India by imposing the "Rowlat Act" in 1919. In conclusion, I want to say censorship is justfied until it will help the commo n people. It's not worthy when it is used for own acomplishment of the ruler.