'Sensitive' fears

In a poor mountainous province in northern Vietnam, I met a young commune chairman. He had come to that remote mountainous area as part of a government program to bring intellectuals to lead communes.

He appeared enthusiastic, empathetic to the lives of his fellow villagers, and possessed relatively modern thinking. However, in our conversation, despite our attempts at openness, we couldn't avoid the undertones of a dialogue between a reporter and a local official.

I asked him for information about a corruption case in the area. The cows intended to support the people of a poor village had "strayed" into the house of a district official. The government provided ten cows, but only seven reached the village – that's what the villagers living in the mountains told me in broken Vietnamese.

The case has been adjudicated. The district officials have been prosecuted and ordered to rectify the consequences. But the village chairman, during the conversation, remained cautious: he couldn't tell the story because of something he described as "sensitive," a vague feeling of some kind of unforeseen circumstance.

Never before have I found it so difficult to gather information about a case that had already been concluded by the authorities, a matter that seemed as clear as day. I couldn't understand the details. The people weren't informed about the case either. Officials gave hesitant and evasive answers, citing "sensitive issues."

That young man, somewhat daring to venture into remote areas, quickly adapted to the prevailing behavior, which I would call "self-censorship."

Self-censorship itself is not inherently bad; in many cases, it is even necessary. Self-censorship helps avoid violations of laws and ethical standards, and prevents harm to vulnerable groups. In other words, self-censorship is truly meaningful if it is directed towards the benefit of the community, the progress, and the democracy of society.

But in our country, the concept of self-censorship refers to the refusal to discuss an issue due to its "sensitivity." What constitutes "sensitive" isn't defined; it's simply that people feel they should avoid topics that could create conflict, to avoid trouble for themselves, to appease superiors, and to prevent harm to national interests – interests that sometimes bear the name "national."

"Sensitivity" becomes an impenetrable shield, even if it's just a feeling or a speculation tinged with fear.

The village chairman was able to tell me about the case frankly, clearly, and transparently, because it was a matter of fact, written down in black and white. He even had a responsibility to provide both information and his perspective.

Many people have the opportunity to do so. Many issues need to be transparent. But they choose not to, because the issue is "sensitive." They censor themselves out of fear of ambiguity.

Years ago, before interviewing former Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet, a journalist asked his assistant if there were any "sensitive" issues that should be avoided when asking the Prime Minister. The answer was no. During the interview, recalling that incident, Mr. Kiet told the journalist that "sensitive" was merely a term for the fear of those who are afraid to act and take responsibility for their actions. Self-censorship, in reality, is self-fear.

Self-censorship is highly contagious, to the point that those infected don't even realize it. Because when people self-censor, they choose to do nothing. Doing nothing seems harmless and is always easier than choosing to act and then facing the risks of trouble, or even conflict.

This kind of self-censorship can appear even among the most ordinary citizens. People are unwilling to exercise their legally mandated right to oversight and criticism due to vague fears. This habit of self-censorship will go hand in hand with a precarious state of existence: people live not based on principles, but behave and speak based on "anticipating opinions."

But doing nothing, of course, doesn't mean being harmless; in fact, it can become a hindrance to progress. Society is governed by rules, not by emotions and emotional speculation.

Have you ever decided that you wouldn't voice a constructive opinion, whether at work or online, because of that vague fear of "sensitivity"?

According to VNE