Kashmir newspaper ban criticised

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-37559679

The article discusses how peaceful protesters in northern India, Kashmir, have been criticizing the authorities in Indian-administered Kashmir for shutting down a newspaper accused of "inciting violence". The government said the Kashmir Reader (well known newspaper in the region)"contains such material and content which tends to incite acts of violence and disturb public peace and tranquillity". This essentially summarizes how even in some countries the media is limited to things such as even not being allowed to present peaceful protests that do not provoke destruction and propaganda. 

Facts:

• More than 80 people have been killed in clashes between protesters and security forces and thousands more have been injured in Kashmir

This article is a perfect demonstration of some of the content in media being covered or completely removed as a result of confidential information being released or due to natural censorship. It sort of takes away the moral panic of perhaps needing to know the causes of the protests around them, why its happening, where the source is to all of this, etc. This is especially more significant in 3rd world countries, not specifically India, but to those who are foreign to the digital world and instead consume information from newspapers. But if newspapers are being controlled too, then the information is obsolete in the print industry therefore some consumers may never know of a particular event.