Reason For Abrupt Cancellation Of Light And Sound Show Still Murky: Bangkok

[webfact]

Reason for halting of show unclear

The Nation

The fanciful light and sound show playing on the fence of the Royal Palace to mark His Majesty the King's birthday has come to a close but the reason for its abrupt cancellation was still murky.

"Please don't try to make an issue of the programming," Deputy Prime Minister Yongyuth Wichaidit said yesterday.

The show had an appropriate run considering the flood crisis, he said.

Extending the performances could be construed as excessive and insensitive to the plight of the flood victims, he said.

The government had terminated the programme for this year, but it might be rerun next year due to popular demand, he said.

Organiser Vachirakorn Artkhoomvong posted on Twitter that authorities suddenly told his team to discontinue the show as of Sunday.

It was listed for every night until Friday, he said.

"The organising team was told to cancel the show without a reason given," he said.

All preparations were made to stage yesterday's broadcast following the candlelighting ceremony but it had been scrubbed at the last minute, he added.

Deputy government spokesman Anusorn Eiamsaard said the celebration for His Majesty's birthday was scheduled from last Saturday to this Friday.

The multimedia movie was one of the events and had ended as scheduled, he said, pointing out that it was a misunderstanding that all activities would last seven days.

-- The Nation 2011-12-06

[SunDaRi]

Someone didn't get their share of bribe, one may think.

[beano2274]

I read this morning that the Government and the Palace decided to cancel it because it was deemed inappropriate considering the flood victims, that HRH The King spoke about in his address to the nation.

[Buchholz]

I read this morning that the Government and the Palace decided to cancel it because it was deemed inappropriate considering the flood victims, that HRH The King spoke about in his address to the nation.

Please share the source for that.

Thank you.

.

[Insight]

Toys are being thrown out of the pram.

[beano2274]

I read this morning that the Government and the Palace decided to cancel it because it was deemed inappropriate considering the flood victims, that HRH The King spoke about in his address to the nation.

Please share the source for that.

Thank you.

.

Read the paper we are not allowed to mention on here, on the second page if memory serves me right

[Buchholz]

I read this morning that the Government and the Palace decided to cancel it because it was deemed inappropriate considering the flood victims, that HRH The King spoke about in his address to the nation.

Please share the source for that.

Thank you.

Read the paper we are not allowed to mention on here, on the second page if memory serves me right

The article I read there contained no reference to His Majesty mentioning this in his speech and only referenced the government side alluding to the inappropriateness of the expenditure.

It seems very odd that the event organizer mentioned in the OP and an actor in the event mentioned in the other paper were both unaware of the event's supposed duration.

.

[webfact]

Put aside conflict, King says

Follow this link:

[beano2274]

Am quite sure it says that Government officials met with Palace officials and decided it was inappropriate at this time, seems it was a decision that was taken quite quickly, but maybe I read wrong, still recovering from the weekend

[Buchholz]

Am quite sure it says that Government officials met with Palace officials and decided it was inappropriate at this time, seems it was a decision that was taken quite quickly, but maybe I read wrong, still recovering from the weekend

The article only quotes the government spokeswoman saying the two sides met and discussed the issue.

It further quotes only the government spokeswoman as saying not only what the government said about it but also what the other side said about it.

No one on the other side is quoted.

.

[whybother]

I would have thought that the money had already been spent on these events, and cancelling them wouldn't actually save money to spend elsewhere.

It's interesting that they cancelled this event's showing on the night of the King's birthday.

[beano2274]

Remember the Royal Household tells the Government what it thinks is a good idea, if the Government act on that is up to them, but the Royal Household will not say "hey we suggested it and they said yes".

[beano2274]

Ah yes and we all believe the paper that started the original story. In another paper the story differs, so which one is correct?

Maybe the whole thing got lost in translation, which is often the case with the original newspaper,in fact to be fair with both newspapers.

Edited December 6, 2011 by beano2274

[Buchholz]

Remember the Royal Household tells the Government what it thinks is a good idea, if the Government act on that is up to them, but the Royal Household will not say "hey we suggested it and they said yes".

Ah yes and we all believe the paper that started the original story. In another paper the story differs, so which one is correct?

Maybe the whole thing got lost in translation, which is often the case with the original newspaper.

I'm not so sure the reports differ all that much as they both contain passages that could describe the situation as murky.

The Royal Household Bureau has its own spokesman so it seems simple enough to verify if the meeting occurred and what was said, even if only in broad terms.

btw, there's no report that the Bureau told the government what it thinks nor that it directed the cancellation of the show to occur.

.

[beano2274]

Remember the Royal Household tells the Government what it thinks is a good idea, if the Government act on that is up to them, but the Royal Household will not say "hey we suggested it and they said yes".

Ah yes and we all believe the paper that started the original story. In another paper the story differs, so which one is correct?

Maybe the whole thing got lost in translation, which is often the case with the original newspaper.

I'm not so sure the reports differ all that much as they both contain passages that could describe the situation as murky.

The Royal Household Bureau has its own spokesman so it seems simple enough to verify if the meeting occurred and what was said, even if only in broad terms.

btw, there's no report that the Bureau told the government what it thinks nor that it directed the cancellation of the show to occur.

.

Seems you know the newspapers and the reporters really well, everyone knows they get told something, they do not follow up with researching the rest.

Is one of the newspapers linked to the Government in any way? (a genuine question)

[phiphidon]

I read this morning that the Government and the Palace decided to cancel it because it was deemed inappropriate considering the flood victims, that HRH The King spoke about in his address to the nation.

Please share the source for that.

Thank you.

Read the paper we are not allowed to mention on here, on the second page if memory serves me right

The article I read there contained no reference to His Majesty mentioning this in his speech and only referenced the government side alluding to the inappropriateness of the expenditure.

It seems very odd that the event organizer mentioned in the OP and an actor in the event mentioned in the other paper were both unaware of the event's supposed duration.

.

Have another look. There is an article that specifically states that the light show was curtailed after discussions with representatives of the Royal Household Bureau. The only thing odd here is that I have read it online but the section where the article is referenced to does not figure in that papers online list. Maybe you'll have to read the hard copy or google like I did.

[Buchholz]

Remember the Royal Household tells the Government what it thinks is a good idea, if the Government act on that is up to them, but the Royal Household will not say "hey we suggested it and they said yes".

Ah yes and we all believe the paper that started the original story. In another paper the story differs, so which one is correct?

Maybe the whole thing got lost in translation, which is often the case with the original newspaper.

I'm not so sure the reports differ all that much as they both contain passages that could describe the situation as murky.

The Royal Household Bureau has its own spokesman so it seems simple enough to verify if the meeting occurred and what was said, even if only in broad terms.

btw, there's no report that the Bureau told the government what it thinks nor that it directed the cancellation of the show to occur.

Seems you know the newspapers and the reporters really well, everyone knows they get told something, they do not follow up with researching the rest.

Is one of the newspapers linked to the Government in any way? (a genuine question)

I'm really no more familiar with the papers or their reporters beyond being a consistent reader for a number of years and yes, they both seem to lack some basic journalist fundamentals... like reporting both sides' comments in this situation.

I'm not aware that either are directly linked to the government.

.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

Please share the source for that.

Thank you.

Read the paper we are not allowed to mention on here, on the second page if memory serves me right

The article I read there contained no reference to His Majesty mentioning this in his speech and only referenced the government side alluding to the inappropriateness of the expenditure.

It seems very odd that the event organizer mentioned in the OP and an actor in the event mentioned in the other paper were both unaware of the event's supposed duration.

Have another look. There is an article that specifically states that the light show was curtailed after discussions with representatives of the Royal Household Bureau. The only thing odd here is that I have read it online but the section where the article is referenced to does not figure in that papers online list. Maybe you'll have to read the hard copy or google like I did.

I read 2 online articles there, but all I see are quotes from PM's Office Spokeswoman Thitima Chaisaeng saying there was a meeting between the two sides and then she goes on to say what both sides said. There was no direct input or quotes from the other side.

The only thing that's been cleared up apparently is that situation was not mentioned in the birthday speech.

.

[beano2274]

I read 2 online articles there, but all I see are quotes from PM's Office Spokeswoman Thitima Chaisaeng saying there was a meeting between the two sides and then she goes on to say what both sides said. There was no direct input or quotes from the other side.

The only thing that's been cleared up apparently is that situation was not mentioned in the birthday speech.

.

Oh well we'll just have to take the word of the actor on his twitter account then or maybe the company officer who knew different. In other words, much ado about nothing. By the way have Reuters got in touch with you yet with your personal copy of the Murimoto report just so they can prove to you it exists?

When I said it was mentioned in HRH The Kings address to the nation, I did not mean that the show was cancelled, I meant that HRH The King wanted the government to help the people, and reunite the country by using whatever means possible to do it, maybe they looked then at ways to reduce costs of the shows and maybe that money will then benefit those affected by the recent floods.

Edited December 6, 2011 by beano2274

[Buchholz]

I read 2 online articles there, but all I see are quotes from PM's Office Spokeswoman Thitima Chaisaeng saying there was a meeting between the two sides and then she goes on to say what both sides said. There was no direct input or quotes from the other side.

The only thing that's been cleared up apparently is that situation was not mentioned in the birthday speech.

Oh well we'll just have to take the word of the actor on his twitter account then or maybe the company officer who knew different. In other words, much ado about nothing. By the way have Reuters got in touch with you yet with your personal copy of the Murimoto report just so they can prove to you it exists?

When I said it was mentioned in HRH The Kings address to the nation, I did not mean that the show was cancelled, I meant that HRH The King wanted the government to help the people, and reunite the country.

Thank for clarifying and expanding from your earlier comment.

That's one thing, anyway, that is now clear on the thread.

.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Buchholz

[TAWP]

I expect most members will draw their own conclusions on your motives, and why you are querying decisions taken together by the parties concerned.

Yes, most posters will know why he is pushing the issue - just as they will know why you are trying to sweep it under the rug.

[metisdead]

A bickering session has been removed as well as a nonsense post.

[Lifer]

Posters always make a big deal out the any posted article. Increases the count. Put it to rest and enjoy the Holidays.

[biplanebluey]

I read 2 online articles there, but all I see are quotes from PM's Office Spokeswoman Thitima Chaisaeng saying there was a meeting between the two sides and then she goes on to say what both sides said. There was no direct input or quotes from the other side.

The only thing that's been cleared up apparently is that situation was not mentioned in the birthday speech.

.

Oh well we'll just have to take the word of the actor on his twitter account then or maybe the company officer who knew different. In other words, much ado about nothing. By the way have Reuters got in touch with you yet with your personal copy of the Murimoto report just so they can prove to you it exists?

When I said it was mentioned in HRH The Kings address to the nation, I did not mean that the show was cancelled, I meant that HRH The King wanted the government to help the people, and reunite the country by using whatever means possible to do it, maybe they looked then at ways to reduce costs of the shows and maybe that money will then benefit those affected by the recent floods.

He said this in an article----no he didnt ,that was something else----no it wasnt ,i read it---yes you read it wrong no i didnt-------for f***k sake------------------ is everyone happy now--------------------------does anyone care?????????????????-------------- some of you guys really p*** me off when I am trying to find something interesting to read,or something that might even affect me. Read this carefully and if you find any spelling mistakes we can start a whole new thread on my illiteracy------Dougal in dismay

[sparebox2]

IMHO, halting the show could be interpret by some as dis-respect; especially thoses who truely love the king, example, the Yellow PAD.