Graffiti and Censorship

DEFINITION: Uninvited—and often unwelcome—writing and drawing on public surfaces, such as walls

SIGNIFICANCE: In some communities, efforts to stop or remove graffiti have been called censorship

As a form of public art, graffiti has existed for thousands of years, and both ancient and modern examples can be found throughout the world. It has appeared in caves and pyramids and on vehicles, buildings, walls, and other surfaces. Often, it is a form of cultural production reflecting the ideas, values, beliefs, and experiences of people and cultures. It frequently contains images and information regarding a social system and its relationship to specific cultural groups. Graffiti can also reflect the identity of individual artists. Accordingly, it can be positive to the extent that it affirms an artist’s individuality or reflects the cultural identity of its creators as members of a particular community. Graffiti can be either socially approved or condemned, depending on its message and the elements used, as well as the edifice on which it appears.

Modernism

Some observers have associated the gradual devaluation of graffiti with societal values related to capitalism. A greater emphasis on financial interests and materialism gave rise to the presentation and exhibition of art that increased its profitability as a commodity; accordingly, graffiti, with its focus on social values, became deemphasized. Graffiti and other forms of public art were replaced with galleries and museums.

During the 1960s and 1970s, murals were widely accepted and supported by the US federal government. Governmental support of public art was evidenced by the Art in Architecture Program, administered by the General Services Administration. The government’s sponsorship of public art was primarily related to the desire to place art in federal buildings. Consequently, the government adopted various art forms in its facilities, including murals, lightworks, kinetic art, and so forth. Much of the public art during the 1960s and 1970s reflected social issues related to the demand for social equality inherent in the civil rights movement, as well as other themes of social protest related to US involvement in the Vietnam War. Other public artworks reflected unity among diverse peoples and urban issues for which government intervention was sought. For example, in the 1960s, a group of Black American artists, among them William Walker, Wadsworth Jarrell, and Jeff Donaldson, came together to create a mural featuring portraits of more than thirty significant Black historical figures, including Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali, and Marcus Garvey, on the wall of a building in Chicago’s South Side. Unfortunately, the mural, which came to be known as the “Wall of Respect,” was destroyed by fire in 1971.

Public art, or graffiti that conforms to Western culture’s definitions of suitability, is frequently funded by the government or receives support from individuals who reside within the community in which the graffiti is presented. When graffiti fails to engender social approval due to its content, its medium, or its projected location, efforts may be undertaken to prevent its production.

Into the mid-2020s, graffiti gained legitimacy in the art world thanks to superstar artists, such as Banksy and Shepard Fairey. These artists continued to blur the lines between street art, protest art, and fine art. Further, in the digital age, new techniques in graffiti have made the art less intrusive. Although many governments around the world continued to ban or regulate graffiti, the COVID-19 era and the rise of protests, such as those associated with the Black Lives Matter movement, hastened the creation of street art.

Censorship

Public disapproval and censorship of graffiti are common, particularly within the inner cities of major metropolitan areas. Many people view graffiti that appears on public buildings, subways, bathroom stalls, and billboards as inappropriate, unattractive, and unwarranted. When graffiti takes the form of angry insults, profanity, or social commentary that challenge or fail to conform to social norms within the larger society, it is usually considered unacceptable.

Public and government opposition to graffiti increased greatly in the United States during the 1980s. The efforts of authorities in New York City to prevent graffiti received national attention. The local government in New York used what some considered extreme measures to prevent graffiti on public structures and transportation vehicles. Graffiti artists were subject to arrest and, in some cases, were chased by dogs. As legal sanctions and efforts to prevent graffiti artists from expressing themselves increased, the artists often developed ingenious and surreptitious methods of producing their work. Defenders of graffiti have charged that there is a notion that some forms of public art are socially acceptable while others are not, which is based on cultural value judgments. Such arguments raise the question of which groups’ values should define acceptable public art in a given community. Some jurisdictions have begun treating certain forms of graffiti as hate speech or extremist expression, resulting in stricter legal consequences. Many cities have introduced stricter local laws, including fines, penalties for property owners, and action after repeated graffiti incidents. Many cities also use surveillance technologies such as security cameras, social media monitoring, and AI tools to identify graffiti artists.

Many graffiti artists live in inner-city communities, which are characterized by declining resources, substandard housing, poverty, and other forms of marginalization. The powerlessness of their existence and their isolation from America’s mainstream often mean that they have limited opportunities to be included. It might therefore be argued that their graffiti represents significant forms of self-expression.

Graffiti, as a form of public art, can contribute value to society by expressing the collective and personal identities of various cultures. It can also inform the public of the status and experiences of marginalized people in society. Research has shown that graffiti can also interact with technology, including its potential use in misleading AI systems and digital surveillance tools.

Bibliography

Barnett, Erica C. “Council Passes New Laws Against Graffiti, Expanding Police Power to Shut Down Businesses for Off‑Premises Violations.” Publicola, 16 July 2025, publicola.com/2025/07/16/council-passes-new-laws-against-graffiti-expanding-police-power-to-shut-down-businesses-for-off-premises-violations/. Accessed 4 May. 2026.

Barthelmeh, Volker. Street Murals. Knopf, 1982.

Cockcroft, Eva Sperling, and Holly Barnet-Sánchez, editors. Signs from the Heart: California Chicano Murals. U of New Mexico P, 1993.

Gastman, Roger, and Caleb Neelon. The History of American Graffiti. Harper, 2010.

“Graffiti Has Undergone a Massive Shift in a Few Quick Decades as Street Art Gains Social Acceptance.” The Conversation, 20 June 2023, theconversation.com/graffiti-has-undergone-a-massive-shift-in-a-few-quick-decades-as-street-art-gains-social-acceptance-196995. Accessed 4 May. 2026.

Redstone, Louis G., and Ruth R. Redstone. Public Art: New Directions. McGraw, 1981.

Robinson, David. Soho Walls: Beyond Graffiti. Thames, 1990.

Saafir, Qimmah. “Art Institute of Chicago Celebrates the 1960s ‘Wall of Respect’ Mural.” Colorlines, 17 Apr. 2015, colorlines.com/article/art-institute-chicago-celebrates-1960s-wall-respect-mural. Accessed 30 Apr. 2025.

Schacter, Rafael. The World Atlas of Street Art and Graffiti. Yale UP, 2013.

Wang, Jiancheng, et al. “Multimodal Backdoor Attack on VLMs for Autonomous Driving via Graffiti and Cross-Lingual Triggers.” arXiv, 2026, arXiv:2604.04630. Accessed 4 May. 2026.

Willsher, Kim. “‘They Act with Total Impunity’: Paris City Hall Declares War on Graffiti Vandals.” The Guardian, 17 Apr. 2025, www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/17/they-act-with-total-impunity-paris-city-hall-declares-war-on-graffiti-vandals. Accessed 4 May. 2026.

Young, Alison. Street Art, Public City: Law, Crime and the Urban Imagination. Routledge, 2014.