nt it.“You know the policy,” the producer remarked sternly. “You must approve any story to the primary government official before it can air.” Imagine living in a world completely ran by the government and all first amendment rights were lost. Where a socialist society was developing and the government decided your job, your wage, and your lifestyle. Where every news story and publication had to follow a procedure and a good twenty people had to “approve” it before it could be released. What if society only received censored information? It seems absurd, but this scenario is not so completely off-line. Our nation has already considered banning certain areas on the Internet. The question of concern is where does one draw the line? What is bad or wrong to one person is acceptable to another. Questioning ones own beliefs and others beliefs becomes a primary reason why the first amendment is so important. Not having the access to information is a reason why women rights are not parallel across countries. There are women in Africa who are circumcised during puberty because it is believed if they are witches they will bleed to death and if they are not witches they will live. There is also women put to death because they spoke out that they had been raped. Some women are killed because they want to divorce their husband. This is a practice that commonly occurs and is mostly genuinely due to a lack of information. Other cultures have only reached the forefront of change because their beliefs have been so strong and they have not received information that could alter them. If information was given to these people concerning the number of deaths that have occurred due to female circumcision, stories from rape victims, and common beliefs from other cultures these acts might not be so prevalent. A government ran society and examples of how journalism could directly affect the loss of women rights in other count...
