Censorship

Censorship has historically played a significant role in the relationship between the state, citizenry, and media in South Asia.
Countries such as Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka have used censorship which dates back to the British colonial government.

Colonial Influence: Colonial governments portrayed natives as needing guidance to avoid moral depravity and tensions of hatred.
Parental Figure: This characterization of colonial rule as protective was used to justify their governance.
Impact of Cinema: The fear of volatile native audiences being influenced by sexualized images led to stringent censorship practices.

Upon independence, postcolonial governments retained censorship citing concerns over public morals and audience behavior, relating citizens to children or adolescents.
Censorship is often viewed in the context of developmentalism; it is perceived that state censorship characterizes 'Third World' nations while developed nations have voluntary regulation.

Dominant Paradigm: Much scholarship centers on state apparatuses with assumptions that:
- The state merely prohibits representations, ignoring practices like certification.
- The state is the sole censor while overlooking involvement from citizens and industries.
- Censorship discussions focus on state authority, overlooking collaboration and negotiation possibilities.
Freedom of Expression: Censorship debates often revolve around whether state restrictions protect public interest or infringe on expression.

Historical events like the Emergency (1975-1977) in India and Zia-ul-Haq’s regulations in Pakistan are cited as stark examples of state power impacting media representation.
Both events reveal how censorship can lead to unforeseen consequences for state governance and media landscapes.

Sometimes, censorship does not provoke protest; bans on Indian films in neighboring countries can be accepted to protect local industries.
Instances of political groups and industries inciting bans on foreign talents have emerged, particularly following national violence.
E.g., bans on Pakistani artists after attacks on Indian soldiers highlight growing tensions.

Pro-Sinhalese Stance: The Sri Lankan government regulates media to maintain a pro-Sinhalese position, which includes bans on films addressing crucial societal issues.
Linguistic Barriers: The Public Performance Board lacks Tamil speakers, impacting film certification and release in Tamil Nadu, leading to production anxieties.
Relationship with the Ministry of Defense also indicates state oversight extends into media production.

The evolution of technology and media regulation reveals complexities in state authority.
New media formats such as cable TV, VCRs, and the internet challenge state censorship, requiring continuous adaptation.
The rise of conservative groups utilizing technology for censorship demonstrates a dual-use scenario for media tools.
E.g., violent acts against media in Pakistan and India point to the contested nature of expression in these regions.

The Information Technology Act (2011) holds digital platforms accountable for content that conflicts with state interests, showing continuity from colonial regulations.
Major companies like Google and Facebook must comply with local regulations or risk operational setbacks.
Recent internet blackouts illustrate collaboration between state authorities and corporate compliance in censorship enactment.

Hoek, L. (2014). Cut-Pieces: Celluloid obscenity and popular cinema in Bangladesh. Columbia University Press.
Mehta, M. (2011). Censorship and sexuality in Bombay cinema. University of Texas Press.
Silva, A. D. (2017). Limits of expression: Creative artists and censorship in Sri Lanka. International Centre for Ethnic Studies.