Talk:Censorship in Germany

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 October 2018 and 12 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hannahgoss. Peer reviewers: Avivaw23.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Dead or broken link: Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany

The heading "Main article: Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany" leads to an error message. --Catawba 05:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, none of the "Main Article" links lead anywhere; except for the one entitled "Censorship in Nazi Germany". --Catawba 05:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Index

Why is the paragraph about the Index written as if it was something of the past? It is still there, and damn annoying I might add. --Neg 12:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it's because that section does refer to a specific past time period before reunification: "West Germany (1945-1989)". When you get to the section "After reunification (1989-present)", it's made clear that the index of "harmful materials" still applies: "Because Germany kept the West German constitution after reunification, the same protections and restrictions as in West Germany apply to contemporary Germany." Catawba 05:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Response: It is still there, but not in the form foreseen by the 1953 Gesetz über die Verbreitung jugendgefährdender Schriften. This section seriously needs work. I might try to rewrite it later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.188.232.132 (talk) 01:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Video Game Censorship

Someone should add something about the heavy censorship of video game violence in Germany —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.231.205.110 (talk) 00:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Prereading

Hi. First of all i'm sorry, my english is not as good as it should be. So I don't know what censorship means. German constitution say "Censorship doesn't happens.". This means that newspapers should not be read by any censores before it is sold. This doesn't protect you against beeing punished for doing things in the list. This is protected by the Freedom of Speech, same GG-article in the contitution but this can be restricted by laws (as the wiki-article shows). Isn't there a difference between censorshiping and restricting the freedom of speech in english language? --212.23.126.20 01:07, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S: This also means that a nipple-gate-law wouldn't be possible in germany --212.23.126.20 01:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Response: There is no 'nipple-gate-law'. 'Nipple-gate' concerned a violation of regulations pertaining to broadcast content standards, and resulted in fines. I would suggest that anyone who wants to know a bit about moral objections to media content in Germany should read up on the furore surrounding Hildegard Knef's nude scene in the 1951 film Die Sünderin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.188.232.132 (talk) 01:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Mein Kampf

Actually, this book is not forbidden (it is not forbidden to own it or to sell old issues), but the bavarian government owns the copyright on it and doesn't allow new prints. --132.180.252.57 11:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Its sale is not forbidden, and this article doesn't say that it's forbidden. However, this article says it's restricted, which it is, because it's covered under anti-revisionist laws. - Revolving Bugbear 11:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Illegal political activities in West/Reunified Germany

Membership in a Nazi party in general is illegal in Germany only for banned parties, which refers to the NSDAP and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Reich_Party . See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany#The_2001.E2.80.932003_banning_attempt . The formation, membership, participation and support of a criminal organisation (§129 criminal code) or of a terrorist organisation (§129a) is illegal. §129 was enforced in 1871 to ban parties like Social Democratic Party (the ban was lifted in 1890). §129a was enforced in 1976 to criminalize any support for far-left militant organisations like Red Army Faction, and to charge their members even when they didn't commit any crime. Wehrsportgruppen (far-right groups for paramilitary training) are also banned according to §129a because they are considered to be a threat for the government, due to earlier attempts by nazi paramilitaries to overthrow the state (Kapp Putsch, Beer Hall Putsch). Any social structure that is considered anti-constitutional is under surveillance of the Verfassungsschutz. This has a chilling effect as most people and mainstream media practise self-censorship to avoid getting in the focus of state surveillance and repression. Also, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streitbare_Demokratie . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.219.48.225 (talk) 18:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect and biased claim: "Membership in a Nazi party [...] illegal"

I think it is important to edit the claim made in the article that "Membership in a Nazi party [...] [is] illegal in Germany" as this is both an incorrect statement and implies a certain bias. The freedom of association guaranteed by the German constitution can be revoked for associations by the state under certian conditions and in the past this has effected various political associations, not only those of Nazis. According to Article 9 Grundgesetz (German Constitution), "All Germans shall have the right to form corporations and other associations". But this is no absolute right, as the second paragraph of the same article states: "Associations whose aims or activities contravene the criminal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional order or the concept of international understanding, shall be prohibited" (see German original wording of the current Grundgesetz article 9 at http://dejure.org/gesetze/GG/9.html and its English translation provided by the Comparative Law Society based on the Grundgesetz from December 20th 1993 (there have been no changes to article 9 and 21 since) at http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm#9 ). Furthermore, according to Article 21 Grundgesetz political parties are a privileged form of association in Germany and unlike other organisations they can not be banned by the administration but only by the Federal Constitutional Court (see http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm#21 and http://dejure.org/gesetze/GG/21.html ). In the past, these laws have been enforced against political associations and parties of various convictions, including the NSDAP followup Nazi-party Socialist Reich Party SRP 1952 and the German Communist Party KPD in 1956. Only the continued membership in an organization that has been banned for the above reasons is illegal in Germany and this has been put to affect against various political persuasions, including Communists, Nazis and Islamists but also against economic associations used for criminal activities. The question whether the German state has a positive right to ban religious or philosophical associations is a matter of debate and to date no such bans have been put into effect (see Veelken, Sebastian. "Das Verbot von Weltanschauungs- und Religionsgemeinschaften", Diss. Münster 1999 (german-language Dissertation about the question of banning philosophical and religious associations). The current articles wording makes it seem as though only Nazis were effected by laws restricting the freedom of association in Germany which gives the section an uneven bias and contradicts a neutral point of view. (Staysceptic (talk) 12:55, 12 March 2013 (UTC))

Needs to be merged with "Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany"

See Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany; Peteruetz (talk) 17:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I disagree, rather the "Censorship in the Federal Republic of Germany" article needs to be added to this one. The Federal Republic of of Germany refers to a small time period in Germany history and should be added to this overarching articleHannahgoss (talk) 20:16, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Desperately Needs Citations

This article does not have a single citation until the THIRD section. Hannahgoss (talk) 23:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

18th Century

I'm reading Charles Burney's 'Present State of Music in German' etc (1753) and he is being stopped at every customs post in Germany and Austria and his baggage examined and any books he is carrying are confiscated and read, and much later, returned. Why? Can't be a copyright issue. Seeking subversive literature? 2403:5807:1A18:0:D02F:D050:D6DE:F4B3 (talk) 06:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Reconsideration of “Of Love” Exhibition Cancellation as a Form of Censorship

(moved here from my talk page --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC))

I wanted to revisit the recent edit regarding the cancellation of the “Of Love” exhibition that was removed from the “Censorship in Germany” page.

The reason I believe this event is relevant to the topic of censorship is based on the broader definition provided at the beginning of the page, which mentions censorship is mainly exerted in the form of restriction of access to certain media (examples include motion pictures and video games) to older adolescents or adults [1]. The decision by the Lichtenberg district office to cancel the exhibition due to its content—specifically, the reference to a “genocide in Gaza” without acknowledging the October 7, 2023, attacks—seems to align with this definition. It’s a clear instance where public access to certain political expressions in a public venue was restricted.

While I understand that the district office has the right to decide what is displayed in its galleries, this decision directly limited the public’s access to the exhibition due to its political content, which, in a broader sense, could be considered a form of censorship.

Given that the page includes examples of censorship related to media access and content restrictions, I believe this incident is relevant and could contribute to the discussion of how censorship is applied in contemporary Germany, especially in publicly funded spaces.

I would appreciate your thoughts on this and whether we might find a way to include this event in the broader context of censorship. Camioncu (talk) 12:36, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

@Camioncu: I really don't believe that "censorship" applies here. This is equivalent to a university declining to host (or canceling prior to the date) a conference on creationism because they have just realized that it conflicts with their stance on the teaching of biology. They are not preventing or prohibiting the conference from taking place, they are merely exercising the right to not be associated with it by offering their facilities. In the present case, it is a municipal authority that is doing so with respect to the facilities that they have authority over, and responsibility for. They are not trying to prohibit this exhibition if it were to take place in a private gallery, nor could they. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:22, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

I asked for third opinion, as there are no other people joining. Camioncu (talk) 08:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

3O Response: Pinging @Camioncu and @Elmidae. What do reliable sources say? If reliable sources are calling this censorship, it could be included so long as its inclusion is given due weight. If not, inclusion here would be original research. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I find it interesting how differently censorship can be interpreted. An official press release from the city states the following: "The exhibition "Of Love" from August 23 to November 13, 2024 in the rk gallery and the associated vernissage on Thursday, August 22, 2024 will not take place. It was only when the exhibition was being set up that the district office became aware of the individual artistic objects. It became clear that the political stance of the district office and the stance of the artists differed so much that no agreement could be reached. The district office will not be an exhibition venue in which, beyond the first anniversary of October 7, there is talk of a "genocide in Gaza" without mentioning the atrocities of October 7, 2023. The freedom of art is not up for discussion." (https://www.berlin.de/ba-lichtenberg/aktuelles/pressemitteilungen/2024/pressemitteilung.1478684.php) It seems to me that the organizer and the artists have different views, so that the organizer is exercising his right to refuse entry. As long as the event itself has not been banned and could take place at another location, I do not see any form of censorship by the state here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Retro (talk • contribs) 12:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, this piece of news is not picked up by any news agency. So no reliable sources call this censorship or not censorship. I just looked at the definition of censorship in the beginning of the relevant article "censorship is mainly exerted in the form of restriction of access to certain media (examples include motion pictures and video games) to older adolescents or adults" and thought it fits 100% as it's a state owned gallery. Camioncu (talk) 13:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I have to disagree with that. Even a state gallery does not have to offer a stage to everyone, but has the right to choose its exhibiting guests - and as long as the gallery can exhibit privately within the framework of the law, no one's right to freedom of expression has been violated. I found an article that reacts to the cancellation and it also reports that this and similar cancellations are being sharply criticized: https://www.t-online.de/region/berlin/id_100474606/berlin-bezirksamt-lichtenberg-sagt-ausstellung-of-love-wegen-nahostkonflikt-ab.html Chris Retro (talk) 14:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I just looked at the definition of censorship in the beginning of the relevant article That is original research. If no sources are calling this censorship, then it shouldn't be in the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

• I'll note that the deWP article on the gallery, which is easily developed enough to accommodate this level of detail, has as yet no mention of the issue. enWP has only bare-bones coverage of Lichtenberg and none of the gallery, and I'm not coming up with any higher level articles where the material would be well-placed (including the present one). It seems to me that the obvious place to insert this would be in the German WP. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:19, 30 August 2024 (UTC)