jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) I voted: No, it's unethical. I would have voted for the top option, but the interpretation of Thai law is a tricky area and not my speciality... TV stations with the sole purpose of sprouting political propaganda are very dangerous in society; brainwashing, false information, one-sided reporting, mass manipulation are all potentially on the cards. News services must be independant and responsible IMO. Of course, we could analyse the entire Thai / World media outlet controls, but please don't bother - this thread is purely about ASTV. Edited October 7, 2009 by jasreeve17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nomad97 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I think that says it all. So far 100% do not care. What is ASTV anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 I think that says it all. So far 100% do not care. What is ASTV anyway? No, it says that you were the first person to vote. One would have to wonder why you bothered if you don't know the subject... Wouldn't the choice: I don't know suit you better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 If you voted: Yes, other reason or No, other reason, it'd be interesting to hear why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWMcMurray Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Given the choices, I voted Yes, its unethical... but my opinion is the best solution would be for Sondhi to sell his interest in the TV station and let it continue on... Whether I agree or disagree with the station or their views, I believe the more opinions available the better, so I would not like to see any "news station" closed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 No. I hate those yellow pricks and especially Sonthi, but * NO * news source or source of opinion, even when it's utter royalist-ultra-conservative-claptrap should be silenced for any reason.The problem in Thailand is that non-democratic forces such asmilitary and others and their puppet courts and puppet governments meddle far too much with basic freedoms. So keep those nutters in the air! Freedom of speech is a good point Winnie, thank you. My counter argument, as a devil's advocate, would be that, at this moment in time ,Thailand has a very one-sided idea of what freedom of speech means, so effectively you just get pro-government (well, pro army) propaganda. All TV channels are army controlled, the papers are heavily intimidated by the army and ASTV is right wing nationalist (very close to the army ideals). So what freedom of choice do we have??? Freedom of speech is a strong argument. Spending time opening up the debate / media outlets to all, rather than clamping down on anyone (except extreme hate groups - do ASTV fit here?) would seem a good option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) Freedom of speech is a good point Winnie, thank you.My counter argument, as a devil's advocate, would be that, at this moment in time , Thailand has a very one-sided idea of what freedom of speech means, so effectively you just get pro-government (well, pro army) propaganda. All TV channels are army controlled, the papers are heavily intimidated by the army and ASTV is right wing nationalist (very close to the army ideals). So what freedom of choice do we have??? Freedom of speech is a strong argument. Spending time opening up the debate / media outlets to all, rather than clamping down on anyone (except extreme hate groups - do ASTV fit here?) would seem a good option. Really? It's been said before, but I really don't have to go far (2mins from this office in fact) to buy a magazine with a square-headed mug on the front, with page after page of anti-govt rhetoric - a good deal of which has been translated by 2bangkok.com where you can judge for yourself how accurate it is. I've yet to see anybody actually buy these magazines but if they were pulled from the shelves it would be disappointing. You don't see pro-red propaganda on the TV any more simply probably because very few journalists buy into it - in the very literal sense. Memories are still fresh. Edited October 7, 2009 by cdnvic removed deleted quoted material Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Thanks for your blinkered view Insight, and your attempt to divert away from the question (which you didn't address for one iota of a second)... Please stick to the topic: ASTV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) I Voted No. I agree with Kwai in the sense that Media should not be politically censored HOWEVER, Unlike Winne the Kwai, I don't have any problem with Royalists or the Monarchy. And I think it's time for stronger measures to shut down the ignorance of the violent ,red shirt mob rabble that Toxin and his hired thugs are stirring up. Huey, thank you for your vote. With regard to your comment: you start by saying you don't agree with political sensorship, then go straight into a little rant in support of political sensorship. This is very dangerous. I don't like ASTV's message, but that's irrelevant. I don't like the red shirt leaders either, but that's irrelevant too. We either have freedom of speech or we don't. The law must be blind. To say we must have freedom of speech and no political sensorship, but solely for the groups I support, not the groups I don't support, is pretty ridiculous, isn't it? Edited October 7, 2009 by jasreeve17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huey Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, thank you for your vote. With regard to your comment: you start by saying you don't agree with political sensorship, then go straight into a little rant in support of political sensorship. This is very dangerous.I don't like ASTV's message, but that's irrelevant. I don't like the red shirt leaders either, but that's irrelevant too. We either have freedom of speech or we don't. The law must be blind. To say we must have freedom of speech and no political sensorship, but solely for the groups I support, not the groups I don't support, is pretty ridiculous, isn't it? It's deeper than that. Do you think it's ok to censor other violent terrorists organizations like Jamal Islamia? or Al Qaida? In the US we do it all the time. In some European countries all you have to do is deny the "Holocaust" an you will not only be censored but thrown in Jail. Freedom comes with responsibility. Even freedom of speech, if your gonna preach violence against others and anarchy expect to called on it and taken at your word by those you threaten. And furthermore those that you threaten should be able to take action to neutralize that threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Posts that criticize, or politicize the Royal Family are a violation of Thai law, and forum rules. Making such posts will result in a swift and permanent ban (as one poster has learned the hard way). This is a law that is taken very seriously in Thailand and we will not discuss it further. Several posts have been deleted or edited. In using Thai Visa I agree:1) To respect fellow members. 2) Not to express disrespect of the King of Thailand or anyone else in the Thai royal family, whether living or deceased, nor to criticize the monarchy as an institution. Speculation, comments and discussion of either a political or personal nature are not allowed when discussing HM The King or the Royal family. Discussion of the lese majeste law or lese majeste cases is permitted on the forum, providing no comment or speculation is made referencing the royal family. To breach this rule will result in immediate ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Thanks for your blinkered view Insight, and your attempt to divert away from the question (which you didn't address for one iota of a second)...Please stick to the topic: ASTV. I was addressing a point you made. Is that not allowed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huey Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 LoL jasreeve17, there you go, censorship in action. I would comment on it but that would be censored too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 LoL jasreeve17, there you go, censorship in action. I would comment on it but that would be censored too The mods do what the mods gotta do, or we'll all be sensored... Regarding your earlier post: All I look for is consistency Huey. We've all seen yellow shirts with guns shooting at unarmed people, in cars running over policeman - is that not violence too? I see the reds and yellows as very much as bad as one another; to ban one and big up the other seems pretty unfair, either way it's done. As you stated above, sensorship is a very tough subject with, often, unclear divisions. Personally, I'd rather live in a world with less sensorship and the occasional 'problem', than a perfect looking world with heavy sensorship. In this way, the thread seems to be pretty optimistic too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Thanks for your blinkered view Insight, and your attempt to divert away from the question (which you didn't address for one iota of a second)...Please stick to the topic: ASTV. I was addressing a point you made. Is that not allowed? Of course, debate is good. But, Insight, you just attacked without even bothering to comment on the core thread - there's too much of this on Thaivisa (I do it myself sometimes, but I'm trying to kick the habit...), and it goes nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Thanks for your blinkered view Insight, and your attempt to divert away from the question (which you didn't address for one iota of a second)...Please stick to the topic: ASTV. I was addressing a point you made. Is that not allowed? Of course, debate is good. But, Insight, you just attacked without even bothering to comment on the core thread - there's too much of this on Thaivisa (I do it myself sometimes, but I'm trying to kick the habit...), and it goes nowhere. In the grand scheme of things, that wasn't really an "attack", was it? It was merely a counter-observation to your observation. The reason for no comment on the core thread is because I haven't reached an opinion on it yet, but so far I can't see any good reason for pulling it just because of the political associations of it's owner. Besides, if you don't like ASTV simply fiddle with the contrast and make your own DTV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huey Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 LoL jasreeve17, there you go, censorship in action. I would comment on it but that would be censored too The mods do what the mods gotta do, or we'll all be sensored... Regarding your earlier post: All I look for is consistency Huey. We've all seen yellow shirts with guns shooting at unarmed people, in cars running over policeman - is that not violence too? I see the reds and yellows as very much as bad as one another; to ban one and big up the other seems pretty unfair, either way it's done. As you stated above, sensorship is a very tough subject with, often, unclear divisions. Personally, I'd rather live in a world with less sensorship and the occasional 'problem', than a perfect looking world with heavy sensorship. In this way, the thread seems to be pretty optimistic too... Firstly about the yellow shirts, no YOU may have seen that I haven't. I saw Red shirts pouring in from the jungle like 2 bit ignorant savages to tear up the capitol last SongKran (of all times) like the burmese of old. I saw Sohndi's car all shot up from a drive by. I did not see Yellow shirts engaged in that sort of mass terrorist action that I have seen with Toxin's bastards. That being said... I do agree with you I would like to see less, MUCH less Censorship, but more accountability for what pepole say. If you want to say something degrogatory, hatefull, false, or otherwise inflamatory you should be accountible for backing it up and taking responsiblity for your actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 I agree with the premise that if you don't like it then don't watch it. On the other hand (hate this transition...), I'm also worried about media being used as a political propaganda tool, and also about conflict of interest issues. Somebody mentioned to me today: Samak was kicked out of PM office because he used a cooking show for making political comment, DTV was closed down for political associations (some folk will say promoting violence, but I watched both and saw little difference between the two - other than ASTV was more sophiticated), so why is Sondhi being treated differently? My feeling is that ASTV will be allowed to stay up whilst Sondhi is pro-army(ish). If he starts speaking out against them and gathering support than the channel will be quickly closed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time Traveller Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 As if that last picture was not photoshopped. Any person that believes ASTV is less biased than any other news station has probably never watched it. Even still as purely comical propaganda channel it's just painful to watch loud mouthed ASTV presenters go on and on about how evil Thaksin is, how democracy needs to be rewritten to allow someone that they like to govern, how those dam_n foreigners are buying up land, and how unfair it is for Thai people that they're being taken advantage of by these people, how cambodians are stealing the land of thailand every day, how evil and stupid and corrupt every other person is except them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread. We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I voted: No, it's unethical.I would have voted for the top option, but the interpretation of Thai law is a tricky area and not my speciality... TV stations with the sole purpose of sprouting political propaganda are very dangerous in society; brainwashing, false information, one-sided reporting, mass manipulation are all potentially on the cards. News services must be independant and responsible IMO. Of course, we could analyse the entire Thai / World media outlet controls, but please don't bother - this thread is purely about ASTV. The problem is that all media in Thailand are close to someone Unfortunately that problem exists in every country. Who controls the mass media controls the masses...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huey Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Time Traveller, Fine would you like some more? Or is every act of violence from Toxsin's goons photo shopped. Please...photo shop..give me a break. You can support that obnoxious felon if you want to. I would rather see the side that is supported by the powers that be (powers I can't mention in name because of forum rules) triumph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h90 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread.We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Forget it....this threat will be again No way to keep it civilized...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huey Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread.We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Ahh so now you see the need for censorship when it comes to opinions YOU don't agree with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peoria Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread.We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Ahh so now you see the need for censorship when it comes to opinions YOU don't agree with That's par for the course with this guy. "My thread" oh brother, give it a rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread.We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Ahh so now you see the need for censorship when it comes to opinions YOU don't agree with Huey, you're acting like a kid, mate. This thread has a subject and most people are discussing it reasonably. Differing views are welcome, spreading one-sided blinkered hate is not. The fact is: both sides have been violent. Everyone has seen it from both sides. You, Huey the Kid, choose to deny reality and splurt your rubbish. Frankly, if you say that you have never seen the pictures of the PAD guy and his mate with the photoframe shooting at unarmed taxi drivers, and you've never seen the footage of the PAD guy running over the policeman then you are either very badly informed for somebody with such a strong opinion or you're a liar... I suggest that many thread owners would have contacted the mods by now for deletions... I don't believe in that method, better for people to see your childish manner and label you as they wish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide - please don't post any more rubbish on my thread.We have all seen reds and yellows being equally violent... The PAD incidents you deny seeing, were shown around the globe on BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera, etc... This thread is not for your propaganda rubbish! Ahh so now you see the need for censorship when it comes to opinions YOU don't agree with That's par for the course with this guy. "My thread" oh brother, give it a rest. Thank you for your 8 weeks, or 15 posts, worth of experience. Did you want to discuss ASTV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peoria Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 (edited) your blinkered view Insight Huey, that's just the kind of stupidity I can't abide you're acting like a kid, mate.your childish manner Did you want to discuss No thanks, I'm not into the flame war threads. Besides, it's "your thread" and I wouldn't want to overly intrude. So, Enjoy. Someone else will probably come along and you can bash them around for holding a different point of view. Adios. Edited October 7, 2009 by peoria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasreeve17 Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 If you selectively cut and paste you can abuse anybody's words; it's a pointless exercise that's frowned upon. Please feel free to comment on the thread topic with your 3rd post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_r Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Whenever I see this: Firstly about the yellow shirts, no YOU may have seen that I haven't. I saw Red shirts pouring in from the jungle like 2 bit ignorant savages to tear up the capitol last SongKran (of all times) like the burmese of old. I saw Sohndi's car all shot up from a drive by. I did not see Yellow shirts engaged in that sort of mass terrorist action that I have seen with Toxin's bastards. I gotta remind of this: The yellows are no better than the reds, the difference is in the coverage the media make of the two sides. Cheerio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now