Censorship is privacy rights for the government.
The government does have quite a few legitimate secrets to protect. (e.g., a password allowing access to a bunker where nuclear weapons are stored.)
But the government also very often abuses its right to privacy in order to cover up its own wrongdoing.
So in a healthy society, the burden of proof should always be on the government. Citizens should always be extremely skeptical of government privacy claims, and should always demand that the government prove its case specifically whenever it claims it needs privacy.
Also, instead of using so much of its power to protect secrets that aren't really legitimate secrets at all, the government should exercise more of its power protecting the privacy rights of individual citizens, which it has historically done a very poor job of doing.
(As an example, when John-John Kennedy died in that plane crash and his body was recovered and was in the custody of a medical examiner, the Kennedy family used its considerable connections to circumvent the law requiring that photographs be taken during the autopsy. Because they knew that if any photographs existed, the government would be totally incompetent in preventing them from being illegally leaked to the tabloid press. Unfortunately, the average citizen does not have the clout that the Kennedys do.)
(Another example: One of Bob Dylan's several marriages was kept a secret for years because the singer did not want his wife harassed by the media. His concern should not have made any difference to the law, because the law, for good reasons, clearly states that all marriage licenses are a matter of public record. But because he was rich and powerful, he managed to convince a judge to make an exception in his case. Dylan's motives were understandable, but we should all get equal consideration.)