You can make an argument for anything, really. It just depends on whether it's a good argument.
I'd argue that the common interpretation of Fahrenheit 451 as being about government censorship isn't a very good interpretation. What fits much better is the one that the author himself intended:
Fahrenheit's not about censorship, it's about the moronic influence of popular culture through local TV news, the proliferation of giant screens and the bombardment of factoids.
The government is merely carrying out what the people wants:
"Classics cut to fit fifteen-minute radio shows, then cut again to fill a two-minute book column, winding up at last as a ten- or twelve-line dictionary resume. I exaggerate, of course. The dictionaries were for reference. But many were those whose sole knowledge of Hamlet (you know the title certainly, Montag; it is probably only a faint rumour of a title to you, Mrs. Montag) whose sole knowledge, as I say, of Hamlet was a one-page digest in a book that claimed: 'now at least you can read all the classics; keep up with your neighbours.' Do you see? Out of the nursery into the college and back to the nursery; there's your intellectual pattern for the past five centuries or more."
This is the purpose of the firemen: to continue what humans on their own began. Without the firemen, one could argue, the situation would be mostly the same - a few eccentrics, but the majority focused only on violence and quick entertainment.
And that's exactly the statement which Bradbury wanted to make: today, we are going down that path. When I go down my school hallway I see more phone screens than mouths talking. I'm considered an extreme nerd (and so are most of my friends for that matter) for ::gasp:: liking to read and learn. School has moved away from learning and towards making school "interesting" and incorporating "technology". This point about school is also made in Fahrenheit 451:
School is shortened, discipline relaxed, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected, finally almost completely ignored.
Censorship, I would argue, is more about the banning of discussion of specific topics. This isn't censorship. This is a complete end to real learning and thought. It's about staring, blank-eyed, at a screen - Montag's wife is almost not there by the end of the book, with the installation of the screens so she can "watch the story", though the stories are really meaningless.
It's what the people want. So books go up in flames.