To what extent is it possible you justify any type of censorship in the creative media world within democracy

According to Kieran (1997), censorship is the limitation of expression for the sole intention of shielding people from themselves by selectively limiting access to a variety of ideas deemed to be harmful by some authority. Such ideas are perceived harmful, objectionable, or sensitive. Censorship is common in any country – authoritarian, democratic, dictatorial or otherwise. Though political diversity has brought about some freedom, censorship, especially in the creative media is still prevalent in nearly all the countries of the world.
The justification of censorship in the creative media is a subject of debate. Some countries, especially the undemocratic countries, are often high-handed in implementing censorship in the creative media to an extent of crushing some basic individual rights. This shall be discussed elsewhere in this essay, but first lets start with the justification debate. First, according to Kieran (1997), censorship in the creative media is a necessity to manage the spectrum of thought, and prevent any kind of dissent against the practice. Some programs may be fit to be viewed by adults, but have long-term negative effects on juniors. In such an instance, censorship of such materials would do more good than harm, thus justifying its practice.
In democratic institutions, civil liberties must be rooted in the freedom of speech and expression. Infact, one of the essential foundation stones of a democratic society is freedom of expression. The freedom of information and expression must be entrenched and guaranteed in the constitution. In a democratic society, the media must be let free to publish, and the public must be let free to receive the information and the opinions. This is an individual entitlement. In essence, for individuals to be autonomous and have a sense of self-fulfillment, they must be free to receive and impart ideas and information. Freedom of expression is also beneficial in society in that it promotes debate,