It is not about the explicit suppression of certain ideas as such. Just the wholesale extermination of the idea that ideas matter, and the commodification of our passions as a kind of Nebraskan video game for an audience even too jaded to click. This is a complicated topic, because I am denying censorship at the programming level, but I also reckon we work in a culture of informal consensus in which many thoughts are simply difficult to think. Consent implies understanding what they are doing, and there's always a problem with an interviewee who prattles or spills the proverbial guts. All of this will disturb an audience because we are alert to and don't like the sense that a participant is being used.
Prurience is a more peculiar issue.
It is hard even to pin down what it means. But it's the difference between reality television and a genuine documentary. There is more than some sort of sordid satisfaction, voyeurism is transcended. And it is fair to say that some audience members feel that both Good Woman of Bangkok and Cunnamulla are prurient, are somehow distasteful. And also that other members didn't.