CNN, BBC Fully Deserve Criticism Over Thai Protest Coverage

[Samuian]

I was here during the entire episode of the red-shirts and yellow shirts and something was reported in a way that had friends in the states calling and emailing me about how I was doing during the demonstrations. The news they were getting in the states made it seem that the entire country was burning and full scale war was imminent. Nothing was said about outside of the demonstration area. Nonthaburi had some but Pathum Thani had a little. I went to Petchburi province and it was calm with nothing happening. Those outside areas were not reported so everything in Bangkok made it seem like the demonstration was country-wide. Friends in Pattaya reported things were normal although a little low on tourists. Yes, the news was biased on CNN and very one-sided. But then, they are very liberal in their reporting of events in the states so they are going to do it here also. It is surprising to hear about BBC as I have always heard good reports on their reporting. It seems that the news media is only concerned with exciting events rather than the real truth. There are enough of you readers that know that events taking place were not broadcasted truthfully and had to sift through the rhetoric for the truth. Yes, even the government did some laundering of the story but again everyone did. Let's find out the real story before commenting on the CNN/BBC news hype that always seems to be the only story until the real truth emerges.

Suspicion arises that those reporters failed miserably to do his/her homework well, instead followed, driven by "sensationalism instinct" the "exciting path", of tangible "news" reporting, slightly tinted by colonialist superiority attitude towards an assumed 3rd world country, where "these things" happen on a daily scale!

Ah' "military crackdown" on "law abiding citizen who want to air their grievances about a Dictatorship"....

That goes down much better than any seriously researched reporting on these very complex, twisted and highly manipulated events.

These reporters are have been caught off guard, neglecting their duty to stick to facts and if so,

report the whole event by it's width and breath!

Did this just happen by accident through neglect and little or none background knowledge?

Edited June 21, 2010 by Samuian

[hideki]

By the way the twitterheads (or whatever you call them) caught New Straits Times clipping the last video of the killed Japanese reporter to oddly enough fit the line they were peddling within hours of them doing it, so things sometimes get caught.

Couldn't happen to a worse news agency.

Strait Times have shown over time to be probably reddish news agency in SE Asia, which is a shame because previously it had a terrific reputation. It was the go-to paper I read in Malaysia during the 1969 race riots.

btw, could you give a heads up on where that issue of them doctoring video may be found? Thank you.

It was covered in multuiple tweets at the time. Im not sure how you can get back to them. I think/am pretty sure the nation tweets linked to it too. It compared the straits times version with the full one

oh ok, thanks anyway. Tweeting tweeks out of Tweeter is a daunting task, but I will try and I appreciate the head-start.

[Insight]

I am a long term resident of Thailand (15 years) who was watching the only "live" coverage I could get from my hospital bed outside Thailand on BBC World. I was STUNNED at the coverage. I saw it as one-sided and with none of the analysis I would expect from a news organisation I respect and admire. When I read the article in The Nation this morning I felt my opinion to have been vindicated.

I don't want to take sides in the political argument only on the coverage which had none of the depth we got a few weeks later when Athens had violent riots which were covered with cause and effect commentary.

I think the one-sided coverage of the situation in Bangkok and Thailand as a whole for this event meant that many people world-wide remain ignorant of the many problems besetting the country which need to be discussed if only to get both sides of the political argument to look beyond their personal bank balances and spread some of the wealth fairly and equitably to areas of need. But that said the Army, for whatever reason and on whoever's orders, deserves congratulations for its handling of an awful situation which would not have been tolerated in many of our more politically "sophisticated" societies as the article quite correctly points out.

I don't think more "sophisticated" societies would tolerate domination by a feudal elite, a treasonable military coup, manipulation of justice,a rigged constitution and murder of unarmed civilians.There are many foreigners (what on earth are they doing here - few seem to have proper jobs)who rant about the BBC and CNN coverage.But it's a complex situation.Look around at several media outlets and one can find reasonable coverage.Don't rely on one source.

I would ask the same question about Jeff Savage, and a few other Pattaya based "freelance" foreigners who seem to aligned themselves with the red shirt cause. There are a good number of ne'er-do-well foreign "barflies" who have few problems with the context of BBC and CNN reports. It doesn't take much investigation to discover that the main reason for this is their close links with the Isaan region, for one reason or another...

I think that's very possible and I think the Isaan connection you mention may well be the key.Equally there are many foreigners in relationships with (mainly) lower middle class urban women who blithely absorb the yellow line.Genuinely independent minded people are few.

I think you'll be quite surprised how thin yellow shirt support is amongst those with a bit of an education; something you commonly cite as being the source of "independent minded people". Although it is admittedly much higher than those supporting the reds.

[jackdawson]

NE comrades have lost their livelihoods

alas, 'tis true.

the isaan invaders now back in their raised shacks greatly angered the gods and indeed incurred their wrath w/ the bloodshed , violence , death and destruction they gratuitously visted upon their bangkok bretheran.

in their wisdom the gods have repaid the favor by keeping the skies of the north and northeast clear, the rain clouds away and the fields dry. the great reservoirs are ruinously empty . just today it is reported there will likely be no 2nd or 3rd rice crop this year .

can the montenegran and PTP save their supporters from this fate ? money can finance shopping strolls along the boulevards of paris but can it buy water from the sky ?

red women make merit at wat pathum but far away the isaan gods do not sleep well...

Edited June 21, 2010 by jackdawson

[RegularReader]

Yes and the Nations reporting was accurate. Mr Sherman, if you are going to write an unbiased opinion then I think that

it would be wise to point out the biased reporting on both sides. oops you are writing this piece for the Nation news paper, aren't you?

You fail to realize Mr. Sherman's article was not about Government bias or control of the media.

That is a very valid discussion topic on it's own.

This is about reporting on CNN & BBC.

Please stick to the topic.

You fail to realize that I am sticking to the topic. As far as I can tell the topic is unfair and biased reporting by CNN & The BBC. I am pointing out

that Mr Sherman's writing is just as biased by not including other news sources in his article. Sorry if you have a problem with that, but if it bothers you that

much, you can complain to the mods

I don't think you are sticking to the topic.

It is not about comparison.

It is about comments that, CNN & BBC failed to report, what was going on adequately and therefore, left themselves open to accusations of bias and unfair reporting.

Personally, I think their reporting was often sloppy and cliche ridden. Taking the easy way out in explaining a series of very complex and fast moving things, is not easy.

Michael Yon (who is quoted in another post on this topic) was interviewed on TPBS last week. Having covered the war zones in Afghanistan and Iraq (as an embedded journalist), he does have some experience of war reporting at close range - irrespective of what you might think about his personal political bent.

When asked his opinion about the claims of bias aimed at CNN & BBC, he was very quick to point out that although someone like Dan Rivers might have a reasonable knowledge of "standard" Thai political and social events, he probably has never encountered situations like he did, during the protests. He went on the say, this inexperience could explain that in his (and other journos accused of bias) desire to report what was happening, he (and the others) fell into a trap of taking the easy way out.

If you want to discuss what was going on in the Thai media (and still is), that is another topic.

[hammered]

Always interesting to see people attack the messenger and not the message. Has anyone putting our Dave down actually reponded to the bias by exclusion that he actually catches CNN at?

Always remember if someone takes a side in this they will defend who they like and attack who they dont like without any consideration for other issues.

Edited to add: Not the Nation did a classic on journos parachuting into BKK if someone wants a lighter take on this issue. Not surprisingly it was one of their pieces that the usual suspect blogs didnt highlight but bias by exclusion or selective reproting isnt unique to CNN

Edited June 21, 2010 by hammered

[sting123]

NE comrades have lost their livelihoods

alas, 'tis true.

the isaan invaders now back in their raised shacks greatly angered the gods and indeed incurred their wrath w/ the bloodshed , violence , death and destruction they gratuitously visted upon their bangkok bretheran.

in their wisdom the gods have repaid the favor by keeping the skies of the north and northeast clear, the rain clouds away and the fields dry. the great reservoirs are ruinously empty . just today it is reported there will likely be no 2nd or 3rd rice crop this year .

can the montenegran and PTP save their supporters from this fate ? money can finance shopping strolls along the boulevards of paris but can it buy water from the sky ?

red women make merit at wat pathum but far away the isaan gods do not sleep well...

+1, as this post sum the feelings of many of the well off residents (thai and foreigners alike) of Thailand.

The untermenschen came, and destroyed , killed, even burned the malls of the good Mr/Khun XYZ ... how dare they did not stay in their shit hole and dance or get drunk. How dare they came and claimed they also have the right to a decent life.

Reading such post, and reading the original article from the dear good Mr Sherman, make think on how some media reported the Varsaw uprising during the WWII.

I am not comparing this and that, time are different; but still some might think we are living in 'interresting time'!

May the Great Gods protect Mr/Khun XYZ and his 3rd (or maybe 4th) benz, because we still can fear they will come back and burn it on the ground.

NOTICE : XYZ is a fictional name

[Insight]

So the anti-red classes range from the "(mainly) lower middle class urban women who blithely absorb the yellow line" to "many of the well off residents (thai and foreigners alike) of Thailand"...

Telling few posts.

[mazeltov]

Always interesting to see people attack the messenger and not the message. Has anyone putting our Dave down actually reponded to the bias by exclusion that he actually catches CNN at?

Always remember if someone takes a side in this they will defend who they like and attack who they dont like without any consideration for other issues.

Edited to add: Not the Nation did a classic on journos parachuting into BKK if someone wants a lighter take on this issue. Not surprisingly it was one of their pieces that the usual suspect blogs didnt highlight but bias by exclusion or selective reproting isnt unique to CNN

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

[TAWP]

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Non-sense, BBC and CNN wasn't re-telling a message (unless you mean that the Red Shirts feed one to them?), they are creating it from their position and many here think that the message they created and broadcasted wasn't one that was fair or representing what we saw or the one we would have put together.

[RegularReader]

Always interesting to see people attack the messenger and not the message. Has anyone putting our Dave down actually reponded to the bias by exclusion that he actually catches CNN at?

Always remember if someone takes a side in this they will defend who they like and attack who they dont like without any consideration for other issues.

Edited to add: Not the Nation did a classic on journos parachuting into BKK if someone wants a lighter take on this issue. Not surprisingly it was one of their pieces that the usual suspect blogs didnt highlight but bias by exclusion or selective reproting isnt unique to CNN

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Dave is not alone in wanting the international media to be more "knowing".

We all know the issues with local Thai Media, but that is not the point.

I also do not think it fair to single out Mr. Rivers, because both CNN and BBC used other reporters as well.

The problem with these correspondents was that, they often did not know anything, about how this mess came about.

I distinctly recall one BBC reporter - dressed in "battle gear" rushing here and there, looking wonderfully authoritive.

He came to camera with the oldest cliche in the book : "this is a battle between the rich Bangkok elite and the rural poor".

It was later discovered, the guy had been here for 2 weeks. He arrived just after 10th April.

As anyone knows, who was not just recently parachuted in from the moon, should know, the Rich v Poor element is part of it - but only, "part of it"

Both the journalist and whoever edited these reports, should have known better.

In the journalists favor, he did tweet about this and asked for comments.

This was reflected in more informed reporting, for the next few days - then, I think he moved on.

Meanwhile Dan was on his balcony...or was that a "fence" he was sitting on ?

Edited June 21, 2010 by RegularReader

[somo]

The assertion that soldiers were only shooting at armed protesters is clearly rubish. They managed to shoot quite a few journalists - one of them three times just because he was wearing a black T shirt and sunglasses. There were many other filmed examples of unarmed protesters being shot at indiscriminately. As with the police the soliers had insufficient training and in most cases were just blasting away at the first target they found. Disgraceful!

[RegularReader]

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Non-sense, BBC and CNN wasn't re-telling a message (unless you mean that the Red Shirts feed one to them?), they are creating it from their position and many here think that the message they created and broadcasted wasn't one that was fair or representing what we saw or the one we would have put together.

Agree with you 100%

[Portlandstone]

And who are you Mr. Sherman. ...

I for one would believe CNN and BBC and rather than Mr Sherman AND THE NATION, but I am a long visitor to Thailand to I do not need any of the propaganda to help me make my own decisions. I see it with my own eyes everyday.

Sherman is apparently the Yellow Shirts' (and government's) answer to Conor Purcell or Jeff Savage. There are a lot of Purcells and Savages on the Yellow government side, only they hide behind the internet.

[chuang]

And who are you Mr. Sherman. What are your credentials ? Did the Nation or the Thailand Government pay you well for your rebuttal ?

Thank you for your opinion piece, but it only supports the government and does not help any any type of national reconciliation. You are being used or willing being used. The government propaganda fight to ward off any blame at all in Thailand's problem is well served by you.

I for one would believe CNN and BBC and rather than Mr Sherman AND THE NATION, but I am a long visitor to Thailand to I do not need any of the propaganda to help me make my own decisions. I see it with my own eyes everyday.

...I am The Nation lackey.....

[mazeltov]

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Non-sense, BBC and CNN wasn't re-telling a message (unless you mean that the Red Shirts feed one to them?), they are creating it from their position and many here think that the message they created and broadcasted wasn't one that was fair or representing what we saw or the one we would have put together.

yeah, they where out on the streets, filming, reporting and don't spend their time on the internet to find a short blurry video clip, useful for hate propaganda, the only video that tells the only valid 'truth' according to some armchair experts.

Even according to Abhisit the red shirts were ordinary citizens, innocent people demanding democracy.

[RegularReader]

And who are you Mr. Sherman. ...

I for one would believe CNN and BBC and rather than Mr Sherman AND THE NATION, but I am a long visitor to Thailand to I do not need any of the propaganda to help me make my own decisions. I see it with my own eyes everyday.

Sherman is apparently the Yellow Shirts' (and government's) answer to Conor Purcell or Jeff Savage. There are a lot of Purcells and Savages on the Yellow government side, only they hide behind the internet.

Do you have anything to add to this discussion ?

I haven't had time to visit Thai Visa much recently - it seems some people also have not had much time to keep up with what is going on in Thailand...or have you been watching too many BBC and CNN reports ?? 555

Edited June 21, 2010 by RegularReader

[mazeltov]

Always interesting to see people attack the messenger and not the message. Has anyone putting our Dave down actually reponded to the bias by exclusion that he actually catches CNN at?

Always remember if someone takes a side in this they will defend who they like and attack who they dont like without any consideration for other issues.

Edited to add: Not the Nation did a classic on journos parachuting into BKK if someone wants a lighter take on this issue. Not surprisingly it was one of their pieces that the usual suspect blogs didnt highlight but bias by exclusion or selective reproting isnt unique to CNN

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Dave is not alone in wanting the international media to be more "knowing".

We all know the issues with local Thai Media, but that is not the point.

I also do not think it fair to single out Mr. Rivers, because both CNN and BBC used other reporters as well.

The problem with these correspondents was that, they often did not know anything, about how this mess came about.

I distinctly recall one BBC reporter - dressed in "battle gear" rushing here and there, looking wonderfully authoritive.

He came to camera with the oldest cliche in the book : "this is a battle between the rich Bangkok elite and the rural poor".

It was later discovered, the guy had been here for 2 weeks. He arrived just after 10th April.

As anyone knows, who was not just recently parachuted in from the moon, should know, the Rich v Poor element is part of it - but only, "part of it"

Both the journalist and whoever edited these reports, should have known better.

In the journalists favor, he did tweet about this and asked for comments.

This was reflected in more informed reporting, for the next few days - then, I think he moved on.

Meanwhile Dan was on his balcony...or was that a "fence" he was sitting on ?

any sane person knows that a average TV coverage about any event in a country far away has not the depth of an academical analysis.

Dave and the dudes are just upset that BBC and CNN didn't spin their even more simplified version about the evil Thaksin and that all protesters were paid or heavy armed 'terrorists' and whatever nonsense and trash talk.

[RegularReader]

actually dave boy sherman attacks the messagners, CNN and BBC, for not reporting that what he want to hear and what he thinks what is the 'truth'. he just repeats the same old arguments, that got already debunked.

Non-sense, BBC and CNN wasn't re-telling a message (unless you mean that the Red Shirts feed one to them?), they are creating it from their position and many here think that the message they created and broadcasted wasn't one that was fair or representing what we saw or the one we would have put together.

yeah, they where out on the streets, filming, reporting and don't spend their time on the internet to find a short blurry video clip, useful for hate propaganda, the only video that tells the only valid 'truth' according to some armchair experts.

Even according to Abhisit the red shirts were ordinary citizens, innocent people demanding democracy.

Your bias blinds you.

I live in Bangkok; have many red shirt friends and family.

I have a family member who lost his life.

I also have acquaintances who acted as workers for the red shirts.

I listen to these people and their "truths" - it was not what the international media (with a few exceptions) wanted to report.

This was not a battle between "right & wrong"

To use the old Cowboy Western character portrayal : "There were no WHITE hats"

All I ask is that CNN & BBC give that opinion a fair space as well.

[hammered]

The real lesson to be learned here and one that has for a long time been apparent to those whio follow media matters is that it is foolish to give any more credence to what a reporter says or produces than you would to A.N.Other

The job of the media is to sell and that means fitting anything to the story that best sells. That will vary by country, target market etc but still means what we call bias or could call lies.

This is all both helped and made worse by the advent of technology based citizen journalism which means a lot more stuff goes live quickly which means there is greater potential for balance or at least until governments and cabals work out how to better control and influence this and how to flood it with the "right" message. Lots of stuff is being done on this now and all PR companies working in the opoltical realm offer message flooding services for example.

The other side to it is that all the citizen and technology based free news has led to financial considerations for tradtional news media. Now few have locally based resident experts and many journos cover multiple places and topics that they are not used to. This has meant a reduction in expertise although that fits nicely with the dumbing down and soundbite based news morsels that the public with less time and an entertainment basis lap up readily.

A further aspect is that with journalism a nice career with all it entails in many cases, or at least the ones we are discussing, there is more of a tendency not to rock the boat which means in reproting terms fit the "facts" to the story that fits the media sources slant the best.

All those old notions of media as fourth estate and integrity of journalism together with those old balck and white movies showing it as such is actually as much about fiction as the movies wwere themselves.

We live now in a belief based society and people are going to beleive what they want or what is pushed into them. Media just fits as a reinforcer of what you believe or a propaganda source pushing the meme

That all kinda presents a problem for us and it is probably best to form opinions based on what you yourself experience than by anything in a media source either tradtional or modern.

[BIGTOE3]

Yes and the Nations reporting was accurate. Mr Sherman, if you are going to write an unbiased opinion then I think that

it would be wise to point out the biased reporting on both sides. oops you are writing this piece for the Nation news paper, aren't you?

You fail to realize Mr. Sherman's article was not about Government bias or control of the media.

That is a very valid discussion topic on it's own.

This is about reporting on CNN & BBC.

Please stick to the topic.

I agree 100% lets stick to the "Original" topic and not be sidelined by those with hidden agendas.

I think the article was very fair and stayed "On Topic"

BT

[mazeltov]

Your bias blinds you.

I live in Bangkok; have many red shirt friends and family.

I have a family member who lost his life.

I also have acquaintances who acted as workers for the red shirts.

I listen to these people and their "truths" - it was not what the international media (with a few exceptions) wanted to report.

This was not a battle between "right & wrong"

To use the old Cowboy Western character portrayal : "There were no WHITE hats"

All I ask is that CNN & BBC give that opinion a fair space as well.

what bias? to question if the violent crackdown with all the killings were justified and to point out when and where the security forces definitely didn't act according to 'international standard'.

BBC and CNN weren't painting a to simplified black and white picture, but those who criticize CNN and BBc do it.

or should they twisting the 'truth' like you do it?

suddendly you have the best connection to the 'red shirts' getting your 'truth' direct from the source. so you have the 'insider knowledge'.

but just few weeks ago you explained that you could claim that you know nobody who would support the reds. so what?

I'm not sure you live in the same "Bangkok" as the other millions do.

I live an work in Bangkok and if I was to conduct a similar poll I too could find the answer I was looking for if I wanted to say, all the people I work and socialize with, don't support the reds. Your poll means nothing without qualification.

[nonresident]

Bravo Mr Sherman.

Australian Broadcasting Commission deserves the same critizism. As an ozzie, I WAS proud of our national news agency. After their coverage of events in BKK, not any more.

Just an idea: Could it be that for BBC/CNN/ABC to report accurately (with a less pro-red bias) would have been to put their reporters in danger when entering the red camp? Or at least caused them to be refused entry, thereby knobbling their work?

[Who, me ?]

like i said before

the joke that was the CNN/BBC reporting makes u think about all the other western reporting from hot spots that has come before (tiananmen , iraq , etc.)

if u live in bkk (walked among them like i did) and lived through the two month-long red squat in at ratchaprasong , u know they were a combination of uneducated , murderous black-sheathed thugs (i.e., motorcy and tuk tuk drivers and out-of-work soldiers) and paid-by-the-day (from montengro) large sized middle age isaan houswives between rice crops w/ absolutely nothing to do but come down and f up the nation's capital

before burning a lot of it down

i don't know how a reporter having flown in the night before and staying at a 5 star hotel with a great breakfast buffet could have missed this

Excellent post !

[RegularReader]

Your bias blinds you.

I live in Bangkok; have many red shirt friends and family.

I have a family member who lost his life.

I also have acquaintances who acted as workers for the red shirts.

I listen to these people and their "truths" - it was not what the international media (with a few exceptions) wanted to report.

This was not a battle between "right & wrong"

To use the old Cowboy Western character portrayal : "There were no WHITE hats"

All I ask is that CNN & BBC give that opinion a fair space as well.

what bias? to question if the violent crackdown with all the killings were justified and to point out when and where the security forces definitely didn't act according to 'international standard'.

BBC and CNN weren't painting a to simplified black and white picture, but those who criticize CNN and BBc do it.

or should they twisting the 'truth' like you do it?

suddendly you have the best connection to the 'red shirts' getting your 'truth' direct from the source. so you have the 'insider knowledge'.

but just few weeks ago you explained that you could claim that you know nobody who would support the reds. so what?

I'm not sure you live in the same "Bangkok" as the other millions do.

I live an work in Bangkok and if I was to conduct a similar poll I too could find the answer I was looking for if I wanted to say, all the people I work and socialize with, don't support the reds. Your poll means nothing without qualification.

I never mentioned which part of Thailand those I was referring to as Red Shirt supporters come from.

Further, I was merely pointing pointing out, in the old post you found (well done Mr. Holmes) how unreliable "straw polls" can be.

So hey, you've won a point.

I'm a bad boy and shouldn't use people I know as a litmus test.

You seem to think I am one of those people stuck on a bar stool in Nana, or down at the local cybercafe.

Did I make mention of the "killings" ?

No, you did.

Did I give an opinion as to what I thought about them ?

No, I did not.

Did I mention my "sources" were "best connections" ?

No, you did.

Have CNN/BBC ever done any reports about the possibility that things in the red shirt camp, were not all sweetness and light ?

If they did, I didn't see them.

Why don't you now go hunting through your other archives, such as You Tube etc., and find some reports of that nature ?

Edited June 21, 2010 by RegularReader

[jayboy]

I think you'll be quite surprised how thin yellow shirt support is amongst those with a bit of an education; something you commonly cite as being the source of "independent minded people". Although it is admittedly much higher than those supporting the reds.

On the contrary I think the way you put it is very accurate.Those with a "bit of an education" tend to support the yellow shirts.In all seriousness, I'm perfectly well aware that the PAD/yellowshirt view has wide support among middle class Thais which one must presume to be the best educated part of Thai society.My own view is that what foreigners think is really neither here nor there.Some of us enjoy letting off steam but we are essentially irrelevant.The feral foreign reds turn my stomach and I equally recognise that most foreign businessmen here, while not yellow, are highly critical of the Reds and their leadership (and would generally support the views on Western media coverage of the crisis - again broadly echoing the Sino-Thai urban middle class.What I am saying however that the really impressive Westerners, the ones with long experience of the Kingdom achieved at a high level will tell one, albeit discretely, that there is much in the red cause with which they sympathise.

[jackdawson]

Excellent post !

thank you !

[RegularReader]

I think you'll be quite surprised how thin yellow shirt support is amongst those with a bit of an education; something you commonly cite as being the source of "independent minded people". Although it is admittedly much higher than those supporting the reds.

On the contrary I think the way you put it is very accurate.Those with a "bit of an education" tend to support the yellow shirts.In all seriousness, I'm perfectly well aware that the PAD/yellowshirt view has wide support among middle class Thais which one must presume to be the best educated part of Thai society.My own view is that what foreigners think is really neither here nor there.Some of us enjoy letting off steam but we are essentially irrelevant.The feral foreign reds turn my stomach and I equally recognise that most foreign businessmen here, while not yellow, are highly critical of the Reds and their leadership (and would generally support the views on Western media coverage of the crisis - again broadly echoing the Sino-Thai urban middle class.What I am saying however that the really impressive Westerners, the ones with long experience of the Kingdom achieved at a high level will tell one, albeit discretely, that there is much in the red cause with which they sympathise.

Good post Jayboy

[jayboy]

An excerpt of a dispatch from the website of the most experienced war correspondent on the ground in Thailand today:

Michael Yon

20 June 2010

Flocks of journalists – local and international – had descended into the conflict zone, and the flocks naturally brought the toxic guano of consensus journalism, and also great physical danger for the journalists, which danger could be deceiving in Bangkok.

Comparing the difficulty of covering conflict in Thailand to Afghanistan or Iraq is to compare pebbles to boulders. The entrance obstacles to Iraq and Afghanistan will eliminate probably 99% of the international press from any meaningful, long-haul coverage.

By contrast, many international correspondents live in Thailand. CNN correspondent, Dan Rivers, reported that he and his family had to evacuate their residence because the fighting was so close. Covering Bangkok is no more difficult than covering Washington D.C., and in fact Bangkok might be easier when considering visa issues.

Full report:

Even While the World Watched

Michael Yon is a distinguished war correspondent but he knows nothing about Thailand.He made some observations which have been hawked around by the social media and the Government PR people.Of course it's harde to cover conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.Read his Thailand material and see whether you think he's on the ball.

[Thai at Heart]

I think you'll be quite surprised how thin yellow shirt support is amongst those with a bit of an education; something you commonly cite as being the source of "independent minded people". Although it is admittedly much higher than those supporting the reds.

On the contrary I think the way you put it is very accurate.Those with a "bit of an education" tend to support the yellow shirts.In all seriousness, I'm perfectly well aware that the PAD/yellowshirt view has wide support among middle class Thais which one must presume to be the best educated part of Thai society.My own view is that what foreigners think is really neither here nor there.Some of us enjoy letting off steam but we are essentially irrelevant.The feral foreign reds turn my stomach and I equally recognise that most foreign businessmen here, while not yellow, are highly critical of the Reds and their leadership (and would generally support the views on Western media coverage of the crisis - again broadly echoing the Sino-Thai urban middle class.What I am saying however that the really impressive Westerners, the ones with long experience of the Kingdom achieved at a high level will tell one, albeit discretely, that there is much in the red cause with which they sympathise.

Absolutely spot on.