Amendment To The Printing Act Of 2007 Will Take Press Freedom In Thailand Back To The Dark Ages

[robanywhere]

Being from the US, these types of laws are actually passed and then later shot down as unconstitutional all the time.

Ummm, notwithstanding the "USA Patriot Act" of 2001, renewed for another four years last May (another lost opportunity to do something right).

... a law to restrict your freedoms so The State can protect your freedoms from The Enemy...

... i guess it depends on who's controlling who's interpreting the Constitution....

[Buchholz]

From another thread;

-------------------------------------

Posted Yesterday, 09:07

Not to worry, the Nationmedia's day of reckoning is drawing nigh.

---------------------------------------

Ditto.

You're the first person I ever saw that agreed with you on anything.

"from another thread"

Not to worry, the Nationmedia's day of reckoning is drawing nigh.

[wintermute]

If the majority of the population is "smart" enough to elect the current regime

Then perhaps they do not deserve certain rights

This sort of governing will continue as long as people choose their "elected"

officials based on who pays them the most

You can be stupid as a stump,

and that doesn't mean you should lose you rights.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Thais fail to educate themselves or maintain societal standards to check politicians and big business interests. It really is nobody's fault but their own. It's not even on their cultural radar, just look at how the rich carve out little fiefdoms where they can do just about anything and how Thais demonstrate subservience to this system time and time again.

[Abduljabbar01]

Sounds like Thailand is turning into "China".

[hellodolly]

Dear g'kid, just further evidence that you don't believe in freedom of speech. I recall one of your posts just two or three weeks ago when you said words to the effect that you hope for the day when the hammer comes down hard on anybody who says negative things about your idol.

Another exaggerated claim. I do not worship before idols. You have taken my position out of context.

Along with rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately, the very same people in the print media that claim "freedom of expression" are often the same ones that spread falsehoods and utter malicious allegations intended to cause harm and foment civil strife. It is no secret that one small media conglomerate has what can politely be termed (IMHO), a nasty vendetta with another group and it appears it will use hyperbole and exaggerated claims to press its scorched earth campaign of hate.

I could understand the concern if there was athriving independent broadcast media in Thailand. Most of the networks areeither controlled directly or indirectly by the government or the military. Evenprint media which traditionally was left to private enterprise has aconcentration of ownership interests. It is to a great extent, a monopoly. 2 Newspapers control in excess of 50% of the market (as per BBC); ThaiRath - 34% and Daily News - 19%. They also have what is described as a very close relationship with vested ruling interests, particularly themilitary. Is it any wonder then that these papers focus on gory crime, car crashes and sports than anything else?

I prefer to wait and see what the opinions of Matichon - 12% and Thai Post - 9%are. Matichon is the paper that took on the Shinwatra clan and I believe it was the first to break the stories on Shin Corporation. Thai Post also has been quite critical, but in a positive constructive manner. I think they have both tried to be fair.

If one print media group is distressed, then so be it. I think that the system that protected that group from competition in the past is now about to smother it with the same type of rules used to curtail that group's competition. Too bad. As yee sow, so shall yee reap.

You say

"Unfortunately, the very same people in the print media that claim "freedom of expression" are often the same ones that spread falsehoods and utter malicious allegations intended to cause harm and foment civil strife."

I presume you are talking of the red shirts. It is their type of propaganda that brings up the question of the value of censorship.

The censorship of articles about the monarchy are exceptable to Thais.

It is interesting that the very government that used the freedom of expression to help it into power now wants to abolish it.

If I read it rite they will be allowed to hold armed rallies over a period of days in the heart of Bangkok from a stage publicly urge their supporters to burn Bangkok down and not allow the press to print it.

You go on to say and I quote

"They also have what is described as a very close relationship with vested ruling interests, particularly themilitary"

I thought that ws what people say about the military when the democrats were in power.

Does the pay master pay people to use such obvious misdirection to take the focus off of his role as invisible PM.

Edited November 5, 2011 by hellodolly

[hellodolly]

Why would any government in the world today consider a law limiting free speech and public opinion, especially handing the enforcement to the police? The answer is because that government is already controlling speech by force and without popular mandate.

In the case of Thailand, that is done by the military, encouraged by powerful, but mean-spirited, Thais who simply have no regard for basic rights or the humanity of their fellow citizens. Article 112 is also another reason why limiting free speech still has traction in Thailand. Article 112 is a complete absurdity.

Yes, this would be a step backward. It displays a way of thinking that is becoming less and less "exportable" beyond Thailand (or any other country practicing it: China, notably). The idea that states exist to serve and protect the few and the privileged is out of date in the 21st century.

"The idea that states exist to serve and protect the few and the privileged is out of date in the 21st century."

Interesting stand to take here in Thailand when the state is doing every thing in it's power to save the business center of Bangkok from the flood and doing it at the expense of its citizens. Sounds to me like they are trying to protect the elite.

[EarthAlien]

Dear g'kid, just further evidence that you don't believe in freedom of speech. I recall one of your posts just two or three weeks ago when you said words to the effect that you hope for the day when the hammer comes down hard on anybody who says negative things about your idol.

Another exaggerated claim. I do not worship before idols. You have taken my position out of context.

Along with rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately, the very same people in the print media that claim "freedom of expression" are often the same ones that spread falsehoods and utter malicious allegations intended to cause harm and foment civil strife. It is no secret that one small media conglomerate has what can politely be termed (IMHO), a nasty vendetta with another group and it appears it will use hyperbole and exaggerated claims to press its scorched earth campaign of hate.

I could understand the concern if there was athriving independent broadcast media in Thailand. Most of the networks areeither controlled directly or indirectly by the government or the military. Evenprint media which traditionally was left to private enterprise has aconcentration of ownership interests. It is to a great extent, a monopoly. 2 Newspapers control in excess of 50% of the market (as per BBC); ThaiRath - 34% and Daily News - 19%. They also have what is described as a very close relationship with vested ruling interests, particularly themilitary. Is it any wonder then that these papers focus on gory crime, car crashes and sports than anything else?

I prefer to wait and see what the opinions of Matichon - 12% and Thai Post - 9%are. Matichon is the paper that took on the Shinwatra clan and I believe it was the first to break the stories on Shin Corporation. Thai Post also has been quite critical, but in a positive constructive manner. I think they have both tried to be fair.

If one print media group is distressed, then so be it. I think that the system that protected that group from competition in the past is now about to smother it with the same type of rules used to curtail that group's competition. Too bad. As yee sow, so shall yee reap.

Well said G'kid ,.. and very relevant.

While everyone is jumping up and down about "draconian" laws affecting the Thai press we lose focus on who owns the press and what their political motives and objectives are.

This isn't just a Thai phenomenon,.. just look at CNN an Fox news. Mr T could learn a thing or two from Rupert Murdoch!

Thank heavens for the Internet,... the last bastion of free public expression (unless you live in Australia where they now have the government controlled filter system in place,... introduced of course to protect the Australian public from Internet "dangers' )

[DocN]

If the majority of the population is "smart" enough to elect the current regime

Then perhaps they do not deserve certain rights

This sort of governing will continue as long as people choose their "elected"

officials based on who pays them the most

Well...then previous governments and leaders should've educated them!

Oh...wait...they came quiet in handy, being uneducated or stupid, as long as they voted for the "right" people.

A dollar to short, a day to late- I guess!

[DocN]

Why would any government in the world today consider a law limiting free speech and public opinion, especially handing the enforcement to the police? The answer is because that government is already controlling speech by force and without popular mandate.

In the case of Thailand, that is done by the military, encouraged by powerful, but mean-spirited, Thais who simply have no regard for basic rights or the humanity of their fellow citizens. Article 112 is also another reason why limiting free speech still has traction in Thailand. Article 112 is a complete absurdity.

Yes, this would be a step backward. It displays a way of thinking that is becoming less and less "exportable" beyond Thailand (or any other country practicing it: China, notably). The idea that states exist to serve and protect the few and the privileged is out of date in the 21st century.

"The idea that states exist to serve and protect the few and the privileged is out of date in the 21st century."

Interesting stand to take here in Thailand when the state is doing every thing in it's power to save the business center of Bangkok from the flood and doing it at the expense of its citizens. Sounds to me like they are trying to protect the elite.

How many times do the thinking people in this forum have to explain it? Saving Bangkok has got nothing to do with the elite!

[Arkady]

Perhaps they will nobble or even abolish the Council of State and try again. Thaksin doesn't want a free press to be a feature of his "second coming" any more than he wants the military to remain free to arrange their own reshuffles.

[jaidam]

Hopefully as well as hobbling the press, they will ban the teaching of world history in schools. Put together these dictatorial tools are very useful in establishing total control.

It would be far more effective if the population remain blissfully unaware of the results of having a government solely made up from 1 family's members. It would cause less alarm when the evil "educated" ones are put to use on the fields. It would also silence critics of the Shinawatra criminal cabal, that have already been successfully elevated to a status above justice.

This Council of State should be dealt with as swiftly as that dastardly Bangkok post journalist that reported on alleged cracks at a certain airport. The return of the billion baht lawsuits would possibly help keep dissenting and realistic views silent. Failing that, we can look forward to the "Iron Fist" that a certain forum member assures us will be used to halt negative views of the ruling kleptocrats.

What a utopia we will be living in when his excellency's brother in law has total media control. Can't wait.

[scorecard]

Dear g'kid, just further evidence that you don't believe in freedom of speech. I recall one of your posts just two or three weeks ago when you said words to the effect that you hope for the day when the hammer comes down hard on anybody who says negative things about your idol.

Another exaggerated claim. I do not worship before idols. You have taken my position out of context.

Along with rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately, the very same people in the print media that claim "freedom of expression" are often the same ones that spread falsehoods and utter malicious allegations intended to cause harm and foment civil strife. It is no secret that one small media conglomerate has what can politely be termed (IMHO), a nasty vendetta with another group and it appears it will use hyperbole and exaggerated claims to press its scorched earth campaign of hate.

I could understand the concern if there was athriving independent broadcast media in Thailand. Most of the networks areeither controlled directly or indirectly by the government or the military. Evenprint media which traditionally was left to private enterprise has aconcentration of ownership interests. It is to a great extent, a monopoly. 2 Newspapers control in excess of 50% of the market (as per BBC); ThaiRath - 34% and Daily News - 19%. They also have what is described as a very close relationship with vested ruling interests, particularly themilitary. Is it any wonder then that these papers focus on gory crime, car crashes and sports than anything else?

I prefer to wait and see what the opinions of Matichon - 12% and Thai Post - 9%are. Matichon is the paper that took on the Shinwatra clan and I believe it was the first to break the stories on Shin Corporation. Thai Post also has been quite critical, but in a positive constructive manner. I think they have both tried to be fair.

If one print media group is distressed, then so be it. I think that the system that protected that group from competition in the past is now about to smother it with the same type of rules used to curtail that group's competition. Too bad. As yee sow, so shall yee reap.

So you would support a scenario whereby the chief of police can arbitrarily close a newspaper and does not have to provide any explanation for his/her decision to the public, and after all the public is the employer of the chief of police.

[Crushdepth]

Sounds like Thailand is turning into "China".

More like Myanmar. The Chinese are driving forward, the Thai government is rolling backward down the hill.

[yumidesign]

Politicians try to pass a law but it is shot down as unconstitutional. Seems like the system is working. Being from the US, these types of laws are actually passed and then later shot down as unconstitutional all the time. The big difference is that people generally see an editorial as just that .. an opinion piece but for some reason when these editorials are posted here, it gets people all in an uproar and buy into this BS such as the heading "Proposed amendment to the Printing Act of 2007 will take press freedom in Thailand back to the dark ages' when in fact, it would appear the proposed amendment (not shown here) appears to have already been shot down and is never going to happen.

This proposed law would have effected directly effected this newspaper and instead of running an actually news story getting both sides of the story, they choose to run with these one sided, emotional editorials. I am all for freedom of the press ... when you can trust the press even a little.

The fact that it was even a subject for 'the cabinet' (read k.t) to be even discussed or became a subject is a great worry in a country that is about to be brought to its financial knees is truly a matter for great concern for everyone. and the comment in the article -

"There may be a real need to keep in check some kinds of "dangerous" or "counterproductive" opinions"

shows how lacking in understanding of the topic is even among the media. For Buddhas sake dangerous and so called counterproductive ideas are the life of a true democracy!

by the way there is no fence to sit on in this matter, that shows the complete lack of understanding among some on this thread

Edited November 5, 2011 by metisdead
Please do not post in all capital letters, bold, unusual fonts, sizes or colors. It can be difficult to read.

[OzMick]

Politicians try to pass a law but it is shot down as unconstitutional. Seems like the system is working. Being from the US, these types of laws are actually passed and then later shot down as unconstitutional all the time. The big difference is that people generally see an editorial as just that .. an opinion piece but for some reason when these editorials are posted here, it gets people all in an uproar and buy into this BS such as the heading "Proposed amendment to the Printing Act of 2007 will take press freedom in Thailand back to the dark ages' when in fact, it would appear the proposed amendment (not shown here) appears to have already been shot down and is never going to happen.

This proposed law would have effected directly effected this newspaper and instead of running an actually news story getting both sides of the story, they choose to run with these one sided, emotional editorials. I am all for freedom of the press ... when you can trust the press even a little.

The fact that it was proposed IS the story. It shows both inclination and intent to strangle press freedom, which SO FAR has been thwarted.

What is the "other side" of the story? What is to be gained in terms of democracy by handing power over the press to the nepotistically appointed BIL of the power behind the scenes?

It is the nature of editorials to take a point of view - that is why they are called editorials.

[Dap]

If the majority of the population is "smart" enough to elect the current regime

Then perhaps they do not deserve certain rights

This sort of governing will continue as long as people choose their "elected"

officials based on who pays them the most

I'm pretty sure the majority of voters around the world vote the same way ... who is going to make my life better (put more money in my pocket)

More importantly I would think ... keep as much money in my pocket as possible as opposed to forking it out to abusive govenments wherever they may be.

[bigbamboo]

Dear g'kid, just further evidence that you don't believe in freedom of speech. I recall one of your posts just two or three weeks ago when you said words to the effect that you hope for the day when the hammer comes down hard on anybody who says negative things about your idol.

Another exaggerated claim. I do not worship before idols. You have taken my position out of context.

Along with rights come responsibilities. Unfortunately, the very same people in the print media that claim "freedom of expression" are often the same ones that spread falsehoods and utter malicious allegations intended to cause harm and foment civil strife. It is no secret that one small media conglomerate has what can politely be termed (IMHO), a nasty vendetta with another group and it appears it will use hyperbole and exaggerated claims to press its scorched earth campaign of hate.

I could understand the concern if there was athriving independent broadcast media in Thailand. Most of the networks areeither controlled directly or indirectly by the government or the military. Evenprint media which traditionally was left to private enterprise has aconcentration of ownership interests. It is to a great extent, a monopoly. 2 Newspapers control in excess of 50% of the market (as per BBC); ThaiRath - 34% and Daily News - 19%. They also have what is described as a very close relationship with vested ruling interests, particularly themilitary. Is it any wonder then that these papers focus on gory crime, car crashes and sports than anything else?

I prefer to wait and see what the opinions of Matichon - 12% and Thai Post - 9%are. Matichon is the paper that took on the Shinwatra clan and I believe it was the first to break the stories on Shin Corporation. Thai Post also has been quite critical, but in a positive constructive manner. I think they have both tried to be fair.

If one print media group is distressed, then so be it. I think that the system that protected that group from competition in the past is now about to smother it with the same type of rules used to curtail that group's competition. Too bad. As yee sow, so shall yee reap.

So you would support a scenario whereby the chief of police can arbitrarily close a newspaper and does not have to provide any explanation for his/her decision to the public, and after all the public is the employer of the chief of police.

Surely the closure of any media should be left to the deliberation of the highest authority in the land, the courts, not a here today gone tomorrow often politically appointed chief of police? That's not a good signal to send to Asean let alone the rest of the world.

[garrfeild]

These discussions about press freedom is completely moot in Thailand because political headwinds and institutional restrictions have always dictated the direction of the press. I can't think of any moment in modern Thai history where this wasn't the case. There is no such thing as press freedom and every source is manipulated from inside.

Its a moot topic regardless of which country you care to mention. It's just a whole lot more sophisticated in the west compared to Thailand. It's pretty obvious here, Thai politics is very black and white because of the self interests of various politicians and what they can cream off for themselves and the power they want.

Edited November 5, 2011 by garrfeild

[Nisa]

Politicians try to pass a law but it is shot down as unconstitutional. Seems like the system is working. Being from the US, these types of laws are actually passed and then later shot down as unconstitutional all the time. The big difference is that people generally see an editorial as just that .. an opinion piece but for some reason when these editorials are posted here, it gets people all in an uproar and buy into this BS such as the heading "Proposed amendment to the Printing Act of 2007 will take press freedom in Thailand back to the dark ages' when in fact, it would appear the proposed amendment (not shown here) appears to have already been shot down and is never going to happen.

This proposed law would have effected directly effected this newspaper and instead of running an actually news story getting both sides of the story, they choose to run with these one sided, emotional editorials. I am all for freedom of the press ... when you can trust the press even a little.

The fact that it was proposed IS the story. It shows both inclination and intent to strangle press freedom, which SO FAR has been thwarted.

What is the "other side" of the story? What is to be gained in terms of democracy by handing power over the press to the nepotistically appointed BIL of the power behind the scenes?

It is the nature of editorials to take a point of view - that is why they are called editorials.

Exactly. This is not a news story. It doesn't contain the proposal and only contains what the writer wants you to believe about the proposal. However, the writer in this case has done well because they have got people all worked up about an issue which they don't know the facts in the least bit. We do not actually know what the proposal reads or who proposed it or their reason for the proposal. Yet, the most responses in this thread take this editorial to be fact even though it was written by a person who would be directly impacted by any law related to having accountability in reporting.

It if funny to read editorials with headlines such as "Obama proposes tax to reduce jobs" written by one of the 1% wealthiest in the USA when in fact Obama and his supporters would explain they simply want to tax the richest 1% of Americans their fair share and they would not be taxed on money spent employing people since this wouldn't be profits.

Bottom line, you are reading an editorial from a person/company/industry that would be directly impacted by a law about accountability in news reporting. Instead of seeking facts, you are choosing to believe an editorial by such a person to be fact without even knowing what the actual proposal was or hearing any statements from those who proposed the legislation.

It very well may be some evil conspiracy some politicians have cooked up or it could be a bad attempt to bring more unbiased truth to the people or something else completely different. We don't know because I have yet to see an English written newspaper actually report properly or honestly on this story.

As for pretending this was something brought up undercover of the floods is completely ridiculous. The proposal went to vote on the 18th and it was obviously being talked about and passed around long before the 18th.

Edited November 5, 2011 by Nisa

[TAWP]

Nisa>> Previous reports, including the one written in Prachathai contains all the info you could need, so don't blame this followup report for your own ignorance.

[hellodolly]

If the majority of the population is "smart" enough to elect the current regime

Then perhaps they do not deserve certain rights

This sort of governing will continue as long as people choose their "elected"

officials based on who pays them the most

You can be stupid as a stump,

and that doesn't mean you should lose you rights.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Thais fail to educate themselves or maintain societal standards to check politicians and big business interests. It really is nobody's fault but their own. It's not even on their cultural radar, just look at how the rich carve out little fiefdoms where they can do just about anything and how Thais demonstrate subservience to this system time and time again.

You think that is some thing stop and think about it the ones doing all the complaining are not the Thais you meet in the every day occurrences you have. Most of them are politically motivated or Farongs and just use freedom of speech to impress their followers and make them think they are doing some thing for them. In the mean time they are busy building their bank account.

While the Farongs gain nothing by it they think they are helping because Thailand is not like home and they just want it to change to be like home.

But they are willing to let the sex and alcohol industry stay the same.LOL

Edited November 5, 2011 by hellodolly

[scorecard]

From another thread;

-------------------------------------

Posted Yesterday, 09:07

Not to worry, the Nationmedia's day of reckoning is drawing nigh.

---------------------------------------

Ditto.

You're the first person I ever saw that agreed with you on anything.

"from another thread"

Not to worry, the Nationmedia's day of reckoning is drawing nigh.

And g'kid, do you add the red rags which publish dozens of outright lies to your list of publications who'se day of reckoning is nigh? If not why not?

And what treatment would you suggest in regard to the doctored tapes etc., under your principles surely they should be jailed for life.

And g'kid perhaps you'd like to share where /how pt got a mandate to limit freedom of speech, and perhaps you'd like to share how this links to the paymasters / jatuporns veeras / etc., loud and numerous claims that they are the champions of democracy? The paymaster has made this claim again and again during his numerous phone ins 'fight for democracy .....'

Edited November 5, 2011 by scorecard

[Nisa]

It really is a shame that the newspapers are completely ignoring this as a news story and not letting people read the actual facts of this proposed but failed legislation instead of only providing one sided biased editorials.

[whybother]

It really is a shame that the newspapers are completely ignoring this as a news story and not letting people read the actual facts of this proposed but failed legislation instead of only providing one sided biased editorials.

The facts are that PT tried to put into law the ability for the police chief to accept or deny media licences and that the publishers needed to apply for a licence, IIRC, every year.

Don't you think that is worth discussing?

[scotto]

Censorship is everywhere in todays life as is cctv we cannot get away from it

all the politicians want is total control in every country why?

Because when you control people and how much they have left to spend after taxes

the easier it is govern and they can do what they want!!

[scotto]

Even here on TV we are censored from freedom of speech

you just cannot get away from it in todays life

So we had just better get used to it i suppose

no matter how much you hate it

[Nisa]

It really is a shame that the newspapers are completely ignoring this as a news story and not letting people read the actual facts of this proposed but failed legislation instead of only providing one sided biased editorials.

The facts are that PT tried to put into law the ability for the police chief to accept or deny media licences and that the publishers needed to apply for a licence, IIRC, every year.

Don't you think that is worth discussing?

What you are saying is not true .. please show a link to back up this claim.

And I actually said it was worth reporting by the media but cannot find any news report about this ... only one sided opinion/editorial pieces.

It seems, that much of the newspapers here do no reporting at all but simply pass along official statements. Then the provide these editorials in place of investigative journalism that appear to be taken as actual news by many readers based on the posts here..

Edited November 6, 2011 by Nisa

[animatic]

It really is a shame that the newspapers are completely ignoring this as a news story and not letting people read the actual facts of this proposed but failed legislation instead of only providing one sided biased editorials.

The facts are that PT tried to put into law the ability for the police chief to accept or deny media licences and that the publishers needed to apply for a licence, IIRC, every year.

Don't you think that is worth discussing?

What you are saying is not true .. please show a link to back up this claim.

And I actually said it was worth reporting by the media but cannot find any news report about this ... only one sided opinion/editorial pieces.

It seems, that much of the newspapers here do no reporting at all but simply pass along official statements. Then the provide these editorials in place of investigative journalism that appear to be taken as actual news by many readers based on the posts here..

Start with reading the OP

http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__4822745

This is the whole point of the thread.

They can ramrod in whom ever they want as Police Chief

and let him muzzle any dissenting papers and communications sources.

In a word: Diabolical.

Edited November 6, 2011 by animatic

[AleG]

It really is a shame that the newspapers are completely ignoring this as a news story and not letting people read the actual facts of this proposed but failed legislation instead of only providing one sided biased editorials.

The facts are that PT tried to put into law the ability for the police chief to accept or deny media licences and that the publishers needed to apply for a licence, IIRC, every year.

Don't you think that is worth discussing?

What you are saying is not true .. please show a link to back up this claim.

And I actually said it was worth reporting by the media but cannot find any news report about this ... only one sided opinion/editorial pieces.

It seems, that much of the newspapers here do no reporting at all but simply pass along official statements. Then the provide these editorials in place of investigative journalism that appear to be taken as actual news by many readers based on the posts here..

There was a link to a Prachatai article about the subject on the other thread about the proposed law (you posted there but must have missed the link)

From the article:

The amendments include 7 points:

1. Any print media, excluding newspapers, printed in the kingdom must identify itself by category according to criteria set by ministerial regulation;

2. The National Police Chief is authorized to ban the printing, distribution or import of any printed media which affects the monarchy, national security or public order and morals;

3. Publishers must publish within 60 days after receiving permission;

4. Publishers must identify in the printed materials the category and ISBN of each publication as issued by the National Library of Thailand, and must submit two copies to the National Library of Thailand;

5. The name of the publication must not be the same as or similar to any of the name or abbreviation of any state agency;

6. Publishers who do not submit copies of their publication to the National Library of Thailand within a specified timeframe will be fined up to 10,000 baht; and

7. Those who violate a banning order by the National Police Chief will be punished with a jail term of up to three years or a fine of up to 100,000 baht, or both.

[scorecard]

Even here on TV we are censored from freedom of speech

you just cannot get away from it in todays life

So we had just better get used to it i suppose

no matter how much you hate it

Or you can fight it as best possible with dialogue.