Information can be viewed from a couple different angles. Some may see it as powerful and others might fear it.  When information is known by only a select few it becomes very powerful.  I’m sure we can all imagine what it would be like if we were to travel back in time but bring a modern piece of technology with us. It is pretty easy to realize that by going back in time and bringing a higher piece of technology would leave you at a serious advantage to any other person living at that time.

 Very important information can be just as powerful if it is properly hidden from those people who you want to dominate and control.  If you look at how a corporation functions it normally restricts and compartmentalizes information because it is believed that not all information should be known by all levels of people in that organization. But for every information system there is normally only a very few who are really privy to all information and are the governing body of how that information can be viewed by others.  If everyone in the world had the capability of having equal and unrestricted information would that then restrict the ability for someone to dominate and control you?

 Information is what creates all things because without it the labour and resources would be useless. For information to be frightening there must be a reason. What would make information frightening except someone was using it to dominate your free will?

 There is misinformation that is either intentionally false or accidentally false. Is it possible that if someone is purposefully spreading disinformation it is because they have a desire to control a situation? Should anyone really be able to be the censor of information and have the authority to choose what information is viewed?  If everyone in the world had access to information on creating nuclear weapons would we end up being in peace or in pieces?

There are dangers to releasing information that is extremely sensitive to what some would call national security.  For information to be classified the person viewing it would have to decide based on a set of guidelines what a proper definition of national security would entail.

 If a definition is responsible for how information is classified and restricted from the public’s view what would a proper definition of information classification be? How do you properly monitor what’s safe for society and make sure that classification system is not being used for negative means? When you are informed of all of the facts on a situation it is much easier to make a proper judgement or reaction.  Can there be a way to make sure people are not classifying information that would give them a competitive advantage in a given situation. Can civilian boards, military and government boards not work together to classify information? Would that not allow a much fairer distribution and access to information?

It is easy to see why classifications exist. It is not so easy to see the importance of monitoring the power of the censor and the consequences of not having a proper balance in the way information is classified. Freedom of information requests exist within some countries but those same bodies who have the power of classification decide how free of censorship that information that is requested is. Every government has a different way of defining what information is dangerous and how the public should view it. There should never be a monopoly of power on information.