Ethical Reasons To Censorship In The Toronto Symphony Orchestra

Introduction:
The problem presented in the case of the pianist, Valentina Lisitsa, performing in Toronto caused quite the disturbance regarding the “deeply offensive comments” (Pelly, 2015) posted of her opinions on the civil war in Ukraine. Due to these opinions being posted on the Internet, Lisitsa was not permitted to play at her scheduled performance in the Toronto Symphony Orchestra. Her replacement for the performance was supported by some and opposed by others. Those who supported her replacement took the stand of censorship against hate speech. Lisitsa was understandably upset that she was not able to perform and said that “the TSO [paid] her not to perform because she exercised her right to free speech” (Canadian Press, 2015). On

Although everyone can exercise their right to free speech one must do so in a way not to offend others especially if done on an Internet platform. The topic of free speech and the censorship of the internet is a widely debated over matter. One issue of censoring the internet and what is said, is that it impedes on the right of freedom of speech and expression. There are ethical reasons to censor what is posted online however, each individual has the responsibility to use common sense when sharing an opinion that could potentially harm someone else.The decision that the Toronto Symphony Orchestra was presented with was whether or not to allow Lisitsa to perform. Agreeing to let her play would result in some people being upset that they had allowed someone who had very publicly offended them to perform. On the other hand, by not authorizing Lisitsa to be on stage the TSO would be invading on her right to freedom of speech and expression thus creating a big social issue. Based on either decision there will be many groups of people affected: those who were initially offended by Lisitsa’s comments, those who support freedom of speech and non-censorship, the Toronto Symphony Orchestra and Valentina

In support of replacing Lisitsa, the harm theory states that we must not harm others and regarding her comments concerning the Ukrainian civil war, there were a number of people who felt her remarks to be offensive. Consequently, harm done reflects on Kant's categorical imperative which describes that there is a moral law that respects individuals and their dignity. However, Valentina’s dignity was stripped as her position in the TSO was terminated and replaced with ease. A second right, freedom of speech, is a right that every Canadian can utilize. Speaking out against the conflict in Ukraine was just Lisitsa exercising her right. Freedom of speech is “the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference subject to laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion” as defined by dictionary.com. (2018) According to this right, there should be freedom of speech without government interference, including no repercussions for Valentina Lisitsa expressing her