ical Stuff: Camera Arts Saved A state government decides what art the public should or should not see. A museum forbids exhibition of a work because of its sexual nature. A patron pays an artist for a portrait that exaggerates positive physical qualities. The Nạtional Endowment for the Arts denies funding for a prospective artwork because the cost is too expensive. Congress slashes funding for arts programs that NOT Censorship (2/2) \( \square \)

1. A state government deciding what art the public should or should not see is a case of censorship because it uses governmental power to decide which art is allowed. 2. A museum forbidding the exhibition of a work because of its sexual nature is censorship since it prevents the public from seeing art based on its content. 3. A patron paying an artist for a portrait that exaggerates positive physical qualities is not censorship. This is a voluntary transaction in which the patron commissions a particular style of art. 4. The National Endowment for the Arts denying funding for a prospective artwork because the cost is too expensive is not censorship. This is a budgetary or financial decision unrelated to suppressing ideas or content. 5. Congress slashing funding for arts programs involves government action that restricts art through financial means and is considered a form of censorship. Thus, the items that are NOT censorship are: - Item 3: The patron’s commission. - Item 4: The NEA’s decision based on cost considerations. \(\boxed{3 \text{ and } 4}\)