Phuket Gazette

[steelepulse]

 <OT>Can someone pass the popcorn.  This back and forth beween jts-khorat and vanali is entertaining.  Nice spammy domain thrown in the mix too. </OT>

[jts-khorat]

They are no longer infected and or spreading malicious code. For a short period they were spreading an infection that was located on other sites, the infection was a known one and should have been blocked by a up to date anti virus solution.

Would you please quote your source for this.

I have not found any such statement on the Gazette website, but I still get warnings in my browser trying to open sites that belong to the Phuket Gazette even three days after the initial incident, eg their classifieds section.

A clear explanation of the Gazette themselves would go a long way to trust them more than Google, regardless if my virus scanner would catch the malware they (might have) spread or not.

[vanalli]

Fairly high level hypocrisy there.

Re-thought some of the statements made last night. I guess you are right, there was an element of hypocrisy involved, I still do use the Gazette daily to get at least a general idea what is happening.

I guess I got carried a little bit away after Vanalli put a general discussion about the merits of objective journalism into a personal mud fight, by just assuming that the blog he quoted was mine, the same as I (still must) assume that he actually works for the Gazette, hence his statements must be seen as at least semi-official.

I also am deeply saddened that with a little effort the quality of the reporting of the Gazette could be improved a lot, and I am actually shocked to hear that (presumed) employees of the Gazette believe it normal or even a must that their articles are purely driven by advertisers wishes.

With regard to quotations of articles and pictures on the internet in forums and blogs; I would assume that this is commonplace and accepted local practice, just a short look into ThaiVisa shows full articles of the Gazette including pictures quoted all over the place. Surely anybody with a conscience would remove them if there is a problem and if asked friendly.

And might I remind you that ThaiVisa is very much a 'commercial medium' by itself, surely a fact that has not escaped your attention.

You're still putting words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about the merits of objective journalism. I said that without ads, there is no money for a newspaper to survive. Read my words again. Newspapers survive because of advertising. This is a fact. If the ads on the Gazette website really disturb you so much, learn to use RSS.

This discussion is not about the quality of the reporting in the Gazette. It's about you badmouthing a company while at the same time stealing the content of that company. Which articles exactly are drive by advertisers' wishes? Point them out to us all or stop with your unfounded remarks.

It is NOT accepted that you steal other peoples' content. I've been through your web archives and seen the extent with which you are ripping off content. Thai Visa uses content to incite discussion, which in my mind is "fair use" and acceptable by copyright laws. You steal content and pictures without adding any value to it, which is in violation of copyright laws and is not "fair use". You don't even credit your sources almost all of the time.

I honestly suggest you remove all Gazette content from your website right now.

You're complaining about the morals and standards of a newspaper that makes up the vast majority of the content of your own blog.

I'm not assuming that the blog I quoted was yours. It IS yours. The blog on hotel-travel-phuket.com has your name on it. You edited content right after I mentioned it here on more than one occasion. You've seriously damaged the reputation of hotel-travel-phuket.com and you are only making things worse by calling me names such as "cry baby".

[LivinLOS]

They are no longer infected and or spreading malicious code. For a short period they were spreading an infection that was located on other sites, the infection was a known one and should have been blocked by a up to date anti virus solution.

Would you please quote your source for this.

I have not found any such statement on the Gazette website, but I still get warnings in my browser trying to open sites that belong to the Phuket Gazette even three days after the initial incident, eg their classifieds section.

A clear explanation of the Gazette themselves would go a long way to trust them more than Google, regardless if my virus scanner would catch the malware they (might have) spread or not.

My source for this is my own assessment of the facts as they happened to me. Once I discovered the issue was happening I investigated with a few browsers and with various protections turned off to see what was being distributed and from where.

[LivinLOS]

I also am deeply saddened that with a little effort the quality of the reporting of the Gazette could be improved a lot, and I am actually shocked to hear that (presumed) employees of the Gazette believe it normal or even a must that their articles are purely driven by advertisers wishes.

Having had a few discussion with the past and current editors of the PG I have gained the impression that they would like to do more real journalism but the difficulty of being a very visible farang organization presents them with far greater risks in being a target from outside pressures, be they 'mafia' types liek tuktuks or government (mafia types) in civil service.. While thats not an excuse it is understandable.

With regard to quotations of articles and pictures on the internet in forums and blogs; I would assume that this is commonplace and accepted local practice, just a short look into ThaiVisa shows full articles of the Gazette including pictures quoted all over the place. Surely anybody with a conscience would remove them if there is a problem and if asked friendly.

And might I remind you that ThaiVisa is very much a 'commercial medium' by itself, surely a fact that has not escaped your attention.

Your assumption of the rules of copyright publication and reproduction are not based in any form of law. I dont doubt that if they could be bothered they would win any legal challenge to stop you doing what your doing.

And if you cannot see the difference between user posted content for discussion (often / usually with a link back to the site) and reposting entire articles and photographs on your own site creating content for your personal gain by ads then I guess your not looking at it the same way as me.

Try going getting your own pictures, writing your editorial, and then take the criticism.

[george]

Nothing is being added to the original topic. It's just getting into bickering now.

Thread closed.