After reading more about media law and ethics, I better understand the limitations of censorship. Specifically, I know now that a level of waiting must be involved before something can be censored. That is, the government cannot censor something before it is published as no illegal act actually has been committed until it is published. Despite that, there are still present legal and ethical risks that can warrant prior restraint of something being published. One such example would be in the instance of national security. If the government deems a particular piece of media as a threat to national security, such as if government documents are leaked, then the government has the right to use prior restraint to prevent those documents from being released.
(The image above is from an article I found by Hartford Courant which can be found here: Judge Frazzini’s Censorship Is Extreme — And Wrong – Hartford Courant)
Moreover, my new knowledge about censorship has allowed me to better connect it to the first amendment itself. What I mean is that while you have the right to say anything you want, there are still consequences for if you do. If you decide to threaten someone’s life, you have the right to do so, but immediately afterwards you are now liable for what you said and can be subject to law. While there is nothing stopping you from expressing yourself, there are things that can prevent you from getting away with it after things are said and done.