Jump to content

Prayut threatens to sue media


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Cadbury said:

Angry Ant in full flight. He just lends himself to ridicule

download.jpg

Prayut is sounding more like Donald Trump everyday. And we can all see where the Trump fiasco is heading.

 

Fake news, distortion, enemy of the people. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Justgrazing said:

Best have a read up on the meaning of the word then .. 

IMG_20180824_114814.jpg

But (and I will say again, as I have said before) it will be 'Thai democracy' as espoused sometime ago by the P.M. (his words) NOT 'western style' democracy. :sad:

 

So, let's not get 'excited'. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck Prayut does not read ThaiVisa, it would not make everyone laugh, particularly the editor who seems not to be embarrassed that the general is named a clown almost every day :cheesy:

Some expats seem to love living dangerously in a country yet deemed dangerous in this kind of areas, I'm censoring myself in case, caution is the mother of safety. And do not tell me that I'm delirious, the proof, all the subjects concerning royalty are closed to comments, it's not for anything other than a precaution.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Just like when [the media] is sued by people over defamation, state agencies also need to protect their dignity. They have the right to protect themselves against untrue allegations,” he said.

A state agency is just an organisation, it cannot possess dignity.  It is supposed to exist to support and aid the citizens of the country, so another ridiculous comment from the silly little general with the touchy sensibilities.

If, however, he is referring to the media affecting the dignity of the officers of these state agencies, then I'm afraid that that ship has sailed a long time ago under his mis-management.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suing State media?  That would be the next level we can look forward to for direction and leadership.

I'm no fan of British Royalty, but that's what comes to mind when someone says something about something/someone that they find unpleasant.  It avoids the Streisand effect reasonably well.  Must be horrible to live a life where you've perfected everything and there's nothing left to learn.  Maybe he's 16 and just stressing it a bit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this could be a reasonable solution for the accountability of media (especially in America). The danger exists is when the media tends to editorialize bacts based on their own, often biased, interpretations; as opposed to just laying the facts out and letting people draw their conclusions.

 

There seems to be some sensible logic in this method, to me.  My question is who foots the bill for the legal fees.

 

Cutting loose with our tongue, with no accountability for accurate information, does seem libel.

 

Perhaps if the mainstream media become restricted to revealing facts and only facts, and then leave it to the pundits and bloggers to scrutinization with opinion; this way it neuters the media of the masses to sway people. 

 

Just throwing it out there as fodder...

 

#MediaPropogandaDestroys

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Just Weird said:

Why does he need to have a read-up on the meaning of democracy?  He said that he is trying to steer the country towards full democracy, he did not claim that it existed now.

 

Then he clearly needs a lesson in navigation. Seems he’s got north and south confused.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spike1938 said:

The Thai version of Donald Trump. A business boss and a general cannot be government leaders because they are used to just telling people what to do with the expectation that those people will just obey the orders.

half right…. usual the business guy has some idea of economy and how to run the business or get things on track for the business he represents ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

I am trying to steer the country towards a full democracy as best as possible,”

No, if that were true, campaigning would be in fully swing.  There is no evidence they or he is looking to restore a participatory government, just promises at this point. 

18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

“I have never censored or restricted the media.”

Ah, good for you.   You just censored everything else.

18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

He said it was time for him to take legal action against the media outlets he deemed to have attacked him unfairly.

Note to junta lovers:  Thaksin did that. 

Edited by yellowboat
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, scoutman360 said:

I was in the band that played at one of Arnold Scwharzenegger's campaign tours in California. There must have been something he was good at because he got re-elected.   

???.. Arnie’s re-election was pre ordained

 

his most famous line is “i’ll be back”.... and he was.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johnc925 said:

I think this could be a reasonable solution for the accountability of media (especially in America). The danger exists is when the media tends to editorialize bacts based on their own, often biased, interpretations; as opposed to just laying the facts out and letting people draw their conclusions.

 

There seems to be some sensible logic in this method, to me.  My question is who foots the bill for the legal fees.

 

Cutting loose with our tongue, with no accountability for accurate information, does seem libel.

 

Perhaps if the mainstream media become restricted to revealing facts and only facts, and then leave it to the pundits and bloggers to scrutinization with opinion; this way it neuters the media of the masses to sway people. 

 

Just throwing it out there as fodder...

 

#MediaPropogandaDestroys

Instead, why doesn't he debate those on their specific distortions for all to see and hear in real-time.  Sorry, I forgot.   He does not like to debate.  He likes to whine like a little girl.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, johnc925 said:

I think this could be a reasonable solution for the accountability of media (especially in America). The danger exists is when the media tends to editorialize bacts based on their own, often biased, interpretations; as opposed to just laying the facts out and letting people draw their conclusions.

 

I see where you are coming from, but respectfully disagree strongly. Freedom of speech is a tricky thing, but at the core it's just that; free. If you want to present biased opinions, then by all means you should be free to do so. If you are aware you are presenting twistedfacts or have not done anything towards verifying the facts you are presenting, you should of course be accountable for your words. But at any given time you should absolutely not be banned from performing the act of saying/writing/whatever means of expression you prefer and whatever you want to say. Drawing conclusions should also be the right of every single human being on this planet; if people lack the capability for media reading and always assume everything is true, then it is us as readers/viewers who need to learn -- And this is something that usually only happens through at least a certain amount of trial and error, not by limiting the source of information in any way. People need to question and debate and debate and debate some more and the truth will eventually emerge. There are no ultimate facts; every single thing always have multiple sides to it.

 

Besides, if you limit media to "facts only", who is going to be the authority to say what facts are facts and what are not? It simply doesn't work. 

 

Should Mr. P and the junta be allowed to spill their BS constantly? Absolutely. Should I or anyone else be able to question and debate that BS publicly? Absolutely. Should someone else be entitled to think it's not BS but the best thing ever? Absolutely. Should I or anyone else be able to question and debate with that someone given there's an opposing opinion? Absolutely.

 

 

Edited by Grossman
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...