Youtube

[cdnvic]

CNN isn't even mentioning it on their website.

[sbk]

Find it funny that people think Thai Laws should apply to an American Company. Agree that Thailand has every right to close down the site and shield its citizens from what they view to be Lese Majeste.

Do I think the piece was in poor taste? Yes!!! It's very offensive to Thai People and those who know about Thai culture. With that said, there’s a lot of poor taste everywhere. I walk down the street and see Thai Citizens all the time wearing George Bush looking like Adolph Hitler shirts. To many that's definitely offensive on many different levels. But to me it’s their right to wear.

Do I think there could have been a better way to solve this rather than banning a whole entire site? Of course!!! Banning this site is just exasperating the situation and will most definitely bring about copycats and more banning of things. This in turn will lead to a bad perception of Thailand throughout the world.

Anyway, as the citizens of Thailand hold certain things to be sacred, so do Americans. And it's called the US Constitution. And the first Amendment reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Personally glad that my home country was founded on such principles.

Well, you aren't in the US anymore so please take care to remember that when posting. The block doesn't affect Americans in the US so not sure what your point is here.

[Grover]

Not only that the internet is full of people just trying to get a rise out of others (like the trolls on here). I expect more insulting videos just because of the reaction to this one.

Sad but true.

[Wolfie]

They have are more important things to report rather than something that only a effects a minority, and most probably an immature minority at that.

So your saying Thais are immature because of the reaction to this video?

Dont think you'll last long (here or in Thailand) with that kind of attitude

[Insight]

Rights group criticises Thailand for blocking YouTube

(BangkokPost.com, Agencies) - A media rights group criticised the government's decision to ban video-sharing website YouTube over an insulting clip of His Majesty the King, saying that such an act showed a growing crackdown by the military junta against political comment online.

The Southeast Asian Press Alliance said that although the subject of HM the King was culturally sensitive in Thailand, blocking the entire site raised serious concerns.

"Thais are now deprived of a popular and accessible medium that can accommodate alternative and independent voices," it said in a statement.

Bangkok Post - Full Story

[dantilley]

CNN isn't even mentioning it on their website.

Yes they are.

[gummy]

They have are more important things to report rather than something that only a effects a minority, and most probably an immature minority at that.

So your saying Thais are immature because of the reaction to this video?

Dont think you'll last long (here or in Thailand) with that kind of attitude

Don't be silly,that is not what I am saying, its the morons who dote upon youtube being banned who are the minority. The people who object to youtube are presumably those people who have nothing better to do than contribute to it with their pointless videos etc - they are ones that in my opinion are showing immaturity. And after 20 years living here in Thailand I probably am far more better versed in Thai culture and society expectations and acceptances then you are I suspect, so no way would you hear me saying anything derogatory against the Thais which you would have realised had you read any of my other posts.

Edited April 5, 2007 by gummy

[Wolfie]

Don't be silly,that is not what I am saying, its the morons who dote upon youtube being banned who are the minority. The people who object to youtube are presumably those people who have nothing better to do than contribute to it with their pointless videos etc - they are ones that in my opinion are showing immaturity. And after 20 years living here in Thailand I probably am far more better versed in Thai culture and society expectations and acceptances then you are I suspect, so no way would you hear me saying anything derogatory against the Thais which you would have realised had you read any of my other posts.

Point taken, my mistake

[cdnvic]

I don't know if you can blame the junta for this. All over I'm hearing that the site blocking isn't near as bad as in the Thaksin days, and the guy who made the call according to the news story is a civil servant, not a government minister.

[Jai Dee]

Some offensive posts have been deleted from this thread.

We're trying hard to keep this controversial subject open for discussion, but some posters do not seem to want to comply with the forum rules and the multiple requests from moderators in this thread.

Please bear in mind that ThaiVisa is read not only by you, but Thais as well. We have Thai members who regularly post here, and the forum is also read with interest by some Thai government officials.

As a public forum about Thailand, we must and will comply with the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand.

Understood?

[gummy]

Excellant advice JaiDee

note - edited do to dyslexic keyboard

Edited April 5, 2007 by gummy

[wintermute]

It looks like the original youtube video has been removed but it's probably all for nothing now because the damage has been done. This thing has truly gone international with the mainstream media hubbub and blogs talking about it.

[Grover]

It looks like the original youtube video has been removed but it's probably all for nothing now because the damage has been done. This thing has truly gone international with the mainstream media hubbub and blogs talking about it.

removed by the user apparently.

[TAWP]

You cannot broadcast (I'm taking free to air) pornography on TV in any western country that I know of. You cannot incite people to riot or join an insurrection. You cannot do many things in most countries due to laws governing communications, so regardless of what you wish to believe, all societies and cultures practise censorship according to their common beliefs, and ethics. The reverence of the Monarchy happens to be part of Thailand's.

Find me a country with no censorship.

Yes, you can broadcast pornography on TV in many countries. Don't let your ignorance direct the debate.

[sriracha john]

Google just doesn't get it... perhaps they should use their own search engine to find the answer as to why their analogy doesn't hold up:

Information and Communication Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said he ordered a block of the entire site from Thailand after Google (which owns YouTube) has rejected the minitry's repeated requests to withdraw the clip, and that the ministry has filed to block the offending page last week.

"We have told them how deeply offended Thais were by the clip, but they said there was much worse ridicule of President Bush on the site and they kept that there," Mr Sitthichai told Reuters. "Since Google has rejected our repeated requests to withdraw the clip, we can't help but block the entire site in Thailand," said Mr Sitthichai.

- Reuters

Edited April 5, 2007 by sriracha john

[TAWP]

And I really don't like the way some posters try to make out that all thais are the same. To go as long as edityed other users posts to alter words from 'most' to 'all' is really low class. No, not all thais are happy about the banning. If you can't find anyone that verifies it you perhaps haven't meet enough thais.

Edited April 5, 2007 by TAWP

[lingyai]

It looks like the original youtube video has been removed but it's probably all for nothing now because the damage has been done. This thing has truly gone international with the mainstream media hubbub and blogs talking about it.

removed by the user apparently.

Maybe, though maybe not as is shows the user who put up the video last logged in on March 25th.

[Prudent_rabbit]

Just in case you thought it was a TIT moment

"Last month, Turkey cut off access to the site for several days to block a video deemed insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. Insulting Ataturk is a criminal offense in Turkey.

A court in Brazil ordered access to YouTube blocked for several days in January after clips of a prominent model cavorting in the sea with her lover kept reappearing on the site"

So not the first country or the last

[bangkokrick]

Google just doesn't get it... perhaps they should use their own search engine to find the answer as to why their analogy doesn't hold up:

Information and Communication Technology Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom said he ordered a block of the entire site from Thailand after Google (which owns YouTube) has rejected the minitry's repeated requests to withdraw the clip, and that the ministry has filed to block the offending page last week.

"We have told them how deeply offended Thais were by the clip, but they said there was much worse ridicule of President Bush on the site and they kept that there," Mr Sitthichai told Reuters. "Since Google has rejected our repeated requests to withdraw the clip, we can't help but block the entire site in Thailand," said Mr Sitthichai.

- Reuters

With all due respect i can not imagine that many US citizens revere Mr Bush on anything like the same level as the Thais revere their King. This is not an argument or excuse for allowing the video to remain on line. In my opinion it was right that the entire site was blocked as it was the only available solution at the time.

[robert2]

Just in case you thought it was a TIT moment

"Last month, Turkey cut off access to the site for several days to block a video deemed insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. Insulting Ataturk is a criminal offense in Turkey.

A court in Brazil ordered access to YouTube blocked for several days in January after clips of a prominent model cavorting in the sea with her lover kept reappearing on the site"

So not the first country or the last

You tube is full of fun and entertaining clips but also neo nazi propaganda and all sorts of things.

Built on the ideal of the internet as a totally unregulated media, realities are that this does not fly in the real world.

I can live without youtube. I typed in "Thailand King" on youtube to see how many links there were, around 8-900. I didn't browse through the actual list as I won't lower myself to spectate, and thus indirectly support, any insults to the King. (If I did, it would probably make me write comments which could be perceived threatening towards to the clip poster. I think he already would have received some threats by now.)

This story is not nessesarily bad for Thailand as the rules of law concerning insulting the Thai Monarchy may reach some unaware who doesn't know about these. So hopefully this will help avoid future insults to the King.

Edited April 5, 2007 by robert2

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

Just in case you thought it was a TIT moment

"Last month, Turkey cut off access to the site for several days to block a video deemed insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey. Insulting Ataturk is a criminal offense in Turkey.

A court in Brazil ordered access to YouTube blocked for several days in January after clips of a prominent model cavorting in the sea with her lover kept reappearing on the site"

So not the first country or the last

Yes many countries filter or block access to Youtube and many other sites. Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Iran, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Myanmar, Syria, North Korea, Tunisia, Uzbekistan. Now Turkey, Brazil, Thailand. Brazil was very brief and based on a lawsuit.

China has a very sophisticated 4 plus layers of censorship. They filter down to the packet. Anything that mentions Tibet, Taiwan, human rights etc they will try to filter out.

Some of the Chinese bloggers that manage to get thru all of this to post information on the outside speak of the ordeal of navigating all of this. Not fun sounding.

[Thai-Spy]

Just speculating, but the creator of the video is likely of limited mental capacity and has had some traumatic experience related to Thailand, probably within the context of a romantic relationship. Unfortunately he's unable to separate the issues in his mind and heart and lashes out without thinking. We get this sort of crap in our corporate email from time to time, too; one even went so far as to Photoshop a juxtaposition of a Thai VIP, certain body parts of a woman and animal waste. It's sad but it happens and people who are that bent out of shape deserve pity as much as condemnation.

[QualityTouristNumberOne]

"This video has been removed by the user"

We should all take a deep breath,and not give this jackass any more undeserved publicity than he/she is/has already gotten,

the vid is down,that should be end of story...SHOULD be.

[robert2]

Just speculating, but the creator of the video is likely of limited mental capacity and has had some traumatic experience related to Thailand, probably within the context of a romantic relationship. Unfortunately he's unable to separate the issues in his mind and heart and lashes out without thinking. We get this sort of crap in our corporate email from time to time, too; one even went so far as to Photoshop a juxtaposition of a Thai VIP, certain body parts of a woman and animal waste. It's sad but it happens and people who are that bent out of shape deserve pity as much as condemnation.

The poster pulled his vid from the site. Must have realised that if he go to Thailand and somehow get identified he's in big trouble.

Wonder when youtube will be available again...

Edited April 5, 2007 by robert2

[A_Traveller]

As has been noted the page now has a red box banner stating "This video has been removed by the user."

One thing people may not be aware of is the increased use of YouTube as a training conduit for educational videos {no not that type } which is impacted by such a blanket ban.

Regards

[65Craig]

Find it funny that people think Thai Laws should apply to an American Company. Agree that Thailand has every right to close down the site and shield its citizens from what they view to be Lese Majeste.

Do I think the piece was in poor taste? Yes!!! It's very offensive to Thai People and those who know about Thai culture. With that said, there’s a lot of poor taste everywhere. I walk down the street and see Thai Citizens all the time wearing George Bush looking like Adolph Hitler shirts. To many that's definitely offensive on many different levels. But to me it’s their right to wear.

Do I think there could have been a better way to solve this rather than banning a whole entire site? Of course!!! Banning this site is just exasperating the situation and will most definitely bring about copycats and more banning of things. This in turn will lead to a bad perception of Thailand throughout the world.

Anyway, as the citizens of Thailand hold certain things to be sacred, so do Americans. And it's called the US Constitution. And the first Amendment reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Personally glad that my home country was founded on such principles.

Well, you aren't in the US anymore so please take care to remember that when posting. The block doesn't affect Americans in the US so not sure what your point is here.

Thanks for stating the obvious SBK... Almost forgot I wasn't in the US. If you actually bother to have an open mind to this, my point was aimed at those saying an American Company should remove a post which commits Lese Majeste (there are many). I'm stating a fact that that is a Thai law and not an American Law, and the last time I checked this is an American company and this clip does not go against any American Laws or the Constitution of the USA. You Tube has every right to keep it up if they wish. Once again, don't misconstrue this as me liking this clip: the clip is in very poor taste and I don't like it, but then again it's called Freedom of Speech where the site originates (I do like freedom of speech). Again, if you read my post, I say I have no problem with Thailand blocking the site if they deem it to be against their laws, but it was my opinion that it is only going to exasperate the situation. We are all entitled to our opinions here right??? Or should we start censoring those as well?

[Prudent_rabbit]

From the latest CNN Alert

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/04/0...reut/index.html

When reports of the offending royal YouTube clip emerged in Thailand, the number of views rocketed by 50,000 in less than 24 hours, according to the site's own data.

It generated a lively debate about freedom of expression, although the main reaction from Thais was shock and outrage -- and torrents of abuse at the clip's creator, "paddidda", who is based in the United States.

[robert2]

Looking at the CNN site "world news>asia" I founde the following (Quote):

"BANGKOK, Thailand (Reuters) -- Thailand's army-backed government accused online video-sharing Web site YouTube on Thursday of being heartless and culturally insensitive for refusing to remove a clip mocking the country's revered king.

"We have told them how deeply offended Thais were by the clip, but they said there was much worse ridicule of President Bush on the site and they kept that there," Communications Minister Sitthichai Pookaiyaudom told Reuters.

"I don't think they really care how we feel. Thailand is only a tiny market for them," said Sitthichai, who ordered the entire YouTube Web site (www.youtube.com) blocked in Thailand on Wednesday until its owner, Google, removed the clip."

Youtube refused to remove the clip? The general ban suddenly seems very justified to me.

The clip is still online is you search the posters name on youtube. So youtube will stay offline in Thailand.

Edited April 5, 2007 by robert2

[wintermute]

Youtube refused to remove the clip? The general ban suddenly seems very justified to me.

Why should they remove it? Youtube is not owned by a thai company and it doesn't reside on Thai soil either. If Thais want to force their country's legislation on the U.S. that's another matter entirely and i'm sure the majority of the U.S. population would be _very_ opposed to that concept.

[jayjayjayjay]

Youtube refused to remove the clip? The general ban suddenly seems very justified to me.

Why should they remove it? Youtube is not owned by a thai company and it doesn't reside on Thai soil either. If Thais want to force their country's legislation on the U.S. that's another matter entirely and i'm sure the majority of the U.S. population would be _very_ opposed to that concept.

Update: Removed from Youtube.com, says user removed, but account closed so it's possible Youtube.com did close it down........ I for one am happy as this was a ridiculous video, totally unnecessary. Wait to see when Youtube.com is open again.