Introduction: It is believed that there should be no government restriction on creative artists showing their personal ideas freely, such as through stories, photos or movies. Nonetheless, I strongly disagree with this statement due to the adverse ramifications this action can cause to the public.
Firstly, creators should not be given freedom to express their ideas as misunderstanding might be caused. As an explanation for this, perspectives being expressed through artworks are often abstract and may cause difficulties for the audience to understand, thus, people will tend to approach them in the different ways form the intention of the artists. As a result, this will lead to negative consequences. For example, a picture drawn to encourage people to be more open-minded to sex can be misunderstood that it is persuading them to follow a depraved lifestyle. Therefore, ideas ought not to be shown with ease due to possible misinterpretation of meaning for the audience.
A further opinion to support government restrictions is the chance of ideas that go against the right. Specifically, bad people will see this freedom as a chance to spread dangerous thoughts and persuade others to follow it. For instance, in Vietnam, there are many videos giving misleading information about the government or Communism, in order to disorganize national security. It can be concluded that, products of artists should be assessed before approaching public to avoid bad intentions.
Conclusion: In summary, as there are potential misunderstanding and bad-intended ideas when artists express their perceptions, the attention of the governments is required. This means that it cannot not be disagreed that artworks containing artists' thoughts should be shown to the public with any assessment. However, I think policies would be made in a way that the expression of ideas will still be easy for creators.
Introduction: It
is believed
that there should be no
government
restriction on creative
artists
showing their personal
ideas
freely
, such as through stories, photos or movies. Nonetheless, I
strongly
disagree with this statement due to the adverse ramifications this action can cause to the public.
Firstly
, creators should not be
given
freedom to express their
ideas
as misunderstanding might
be caused
. As an explanation for this, perspectives
being expressed
through artworks are
often
abstract and may cause difficulties for the audience to understand,
thus
,
people
will tend to approach them in the
different
ways form the intention of the
artists
.
As a result
, this will lead to
negative
consequences.
For example
, a picture drawn to encourage
people
to be more open-minded to sex can be misunderstood that it is persuading them to follow a depraved lifestyle.
Therefore
,
ideas
ought not to
be shown
with
ease
due to possible misinterpretation of meaning for the audience.
A
further
opinion to support
government
restrictions is the chance of
ideas
that go against the right.
Specifically
,
bad
people
will
see
this freedom as a chance to spread
dangerous
thoughts and persuade others to follow it.
For instance
, in Vietnam, there are
many
videos giving misleading information about the
government
or Communism, in order to disorganize national security. It can
be concluded
that, products of
artists
should
be assessed
before
approaching public to avoid
bad
intentions.
Conclusion: In summary, as there are potential misunderstanding and
bad
-intended
ideas
when
artists
express their perceptions, the attention of the
governments
is required
. This means that it cannot not
be disagreed
that artworks containing artists' thoughts should
be shown
to the public with any assessment.
However
, I
think
policies would
be made
in a way that the expression of
ideas
will
still
be easy for creators.