Govt Raps WSJ Criticism Of PM Yingluck's Thai-Language Speech

[webfact]

Govt raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech

THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the prime minister's personal spokesman yesterday defended her giving a speech in Thai during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Written translations of the speech in both English and Japanese were available to the media, according to Suranand Vejjajiva, Yingluck's personal spokesman. The Journal's story refers only to a Japanese translation.

Department of Information director-general Thani Thongphakdi, who is also the Foreign Ministry's spokesman, sent a letter to the editor of the New York-based business newspaper explaining that it was agreed in advance that the prime minister would deliver her address in Thai, while the Japanese side would do so in their own language.

In his letter dated yesterday, Thani wrote: "Due to the time constraint, both sides wanted to provide as much time as possible for the ensuing networking session between the private sectors of both countries. This is normal practice at such events."

Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded.

Suranand offered a similar explanation to reporters at Government House yesterday. He said written translations of Yingluck's speech in Japanese and English were made available to participants at a function at the Japan Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday.

"It was agreed with the event organisers. The Japanese side spoke in Japanese and the prime minister in Thai. If the agreement called for her to speak in English, she would have done so. There are no reasons to think that the prime minister cannot speak English. The complete translations were available in print," Suranand said.

He added that it was not a case of the prime minister making a mistake or "blunder", although he acknowledged there might have been some flaws in coordination with the organisers.

Wall Street Journal reporter Eleanor Warnock wrote in a Thursday article headlined "Some Japanese still in the dark over Thailand's flood plan" that Yingluck made her seven-minute speech to the hundred-strong audience without any accompanying translation. This left many of the attending business leaders wondering quite what she was talking about and "awkwardly scanning their handouts for clues", the report said.

"With a Japanese-language copy of her speech already handed out to an eager audience, Ms Yingluck arrived to make her big pitch - in Thai," the report said, referring to the PM's bid to win back the confidence of Japanese businesses hit by last year's devastating floods.

It also quoted a representative from a travel company who said it was "a bit weird" that Yingluck's team did not provide a simultaneous translation.

The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter. Yingluck began her Japan trip on Tuesday and returned to Thailand yesterday.

-- The Nation 2012-03-10

[Chang_paarp]

The reporter seemed to think that because she attended university in the USA Yingluck would be able to speak English. Poor misguided soul.

[KireB]

But she is pretty!

[Unkomoncents]

Watching her try to speak English is like watching a blind person try to hunt.

[seaeagle]

But she is pretty!

......and also in the 'Top 150' most powerful women in the world.

[Reasonableman]

Fearless

But she is pretty!

......and also in the 'Top 150' most powerful women in the world.

[jimbeam1]

But she is pretty!

......and also in the 'Top 150' most powerful women in the world.

Now that does frighten me.

jb1

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

All the linguistic issues aside, the real issue here is how did the Japanese business community respond to Thailand's pitch about its future flood control measures?

Unfortunately, the news post in this thread gives absolutely no clue on that issue, which will help determine whether lots of Japanese manufacturing companies keep their operations here in Thailand with all their employment of Thai workers.

If I were a Japanese corporate exec, I wouldn't bet two cents on the Thai government's actual ability to protect my facility from anything, floods including. But it would be nice to know what the Japanese themselves think about YL's pitch.

[Reasonableman]

The focus seems to be the protocol surrounding delivery of the speech in Thai, and expecting non-Thais to sit through it without concurrent translation into their own language, is it not?

Edited March 10, 2012 by Reasonableman

[culicine]

Seems a translation was provided later, after the speech. What was the point of it then? She's not able to read english off of a bit of paper for 7 minutes? It's not that difficult and doesn't set a good example for english language learning in this country, or confidence for Japanese investors!

[maeab]

She is incompetent and a bad influence on Thai children who are told to learn and speek english on a daily basis, Her english is on a level par with a first grader.

Edited March 10, 2012 by maeab

[abhaya]

I don't aggree that she should have addressed the meeting in English, but both sides should have provided simultaneous translations. Being given handouts simply smacks of laziness and if you are trying to "sell" something to somebody eyes should be on the salesperson rather than a sheet of paper. Posture and expression conveys nuance in the message, otherwise just send everybody an email.

[animatic]

The Wall Street Journal is not a auxiliary organ or partner of the Thai Opposition no matter what our 'Canadian Member' would like to imply.

They could have had simultaneous Thai to Japanese translating like the UN.

It's not like that wouldn't be in budget at this level.

Bottom line the pre-handout was deemed inadequate.

How can you judge facial and body language of the speaker,

when you spend most of the time reading the hand out?

This is a big point for most Japanese business people.

[maeab]

She did not give the speech in english for one reason she cant!

[CalgaryII]

The Wall Street Journal is not a auxiliary organ or partner of the Thai Opposition no matter what our 'Canadian Member' would like to imply.

They could have had simultaneous Thai to Japanese translating like the UN.

It's not like that wouldn't be in budget at this level.

Bottom line the pre-handout was deemed inadequate.

How can you judge facial and body language of the speaker,

when you spend most of the time reading the hand out?

This is a big point for most Japanese business people.

Agreed, the WSJ is not an auxiliary of the Thai Opposition.

But they print what their Thai reps. send them, and their Thai reps circulate primarily in the Thai Amart world - the Opposition.

My European contacts often send me their local political articles about Thailand. The themes and even direct commentary parrots much of the Thai Oposition media.

And it is no problem for them. Their foreign audiences have enough political problems of their own and have no desire to delve into Thai politics to any depth, so it is easy for foreign reporters here. They can do minimal primary research, paraphrase or quote their fellow Thai reporters, and voila, they earn their exorbitant salaries.

Besides, to penetrate that PTP/UDD/Red Shirt unilingual world, which primarily resides outside BKK, is difficult.

Also, I note my friend Animatic's comments about this incident are primarily 'process' oriented, as opposed to content.

Exactly the intent of this article.

Edited March 10, 2012 by CalgaryII

[CPT]

The focus seems to be the protocol surrounding delivery of the speech in Thai, and expecting non-Thais to sit through it without concurrent translation into their own language, is it not?

That does seem to be the issue. Nobody wants to stand around and listen to a seven minute speech in a language they don't understand. After handing out the translation, the Thai language speech was rather pointless. A real-time translation, subtitles, or making the speech in English all would have been better. Making the speech in Thai only serves to provide news clips for the electorate back home and annoy those who have to wait through it.

[CalgaryII]

The focus seems to be the protocol surrounding delivery of the speech in Thai, and expecting non-Thais to sit through it without concurrent translation into their own language, is it not?

That does seem to be the issue. Nobody wants to stand around and listen to a seven minute speech in a language they don't understand. After handing out the translation, the Thai language speech was rather pointless. A real-time translation, subtitles, or making the speech in English all would have been better. Making the speech in Thai only serves to provide news clips for the electorate back home and annoy those who have to wait through it.

Good point.

Speaking to all the nice people in Thailand in a 7-minute soundbite, probably dictated the speech methodology, but spun negatively here, for purposes we can only speculate about.

Smart move!

Edited March 10, 2012 by CalgaryII

[GentlemanJim]

Govt. raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech, #1^

A little Opposition mischief making again? I suspect so. In a backhanded way trying to diminish Ms. Y., knowing full well British born Abhi's language proficiency. To highlight this little tidbit - a seven-minute speech for heaven's sake - says it all.

".............during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Complaining about not speaking English in a Japanese forumn....a bit of a reach. For this 'diminishment' to have traction, it needed English language as the put-down.

"Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded"

This gets at a question of who's "motive"? It is well known by many, that the foreign media socializes and lives in the world of the Amart, when in Thailand. They have little understanding of the mostly unilingual world of the PTP/UDD/Red Shirts. As a result, for example, when speaking to Europeans politically astute contacts, who nevertheless follow their domestic media reports on Thailand, it is often like talking to PADites. So this instance of a foreign reporter dumping on Ms. Y, indicated to me he/she is following the impulses of her buddies.

"The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter.

And by inference, the unspoken agenda is to drive home the point that our buddy Abhi, wouldn't make this mistake. Forgetting the little fact he couldn't win a Thai election, if his life depended on it.

Seems quite a ridiculous conclusion. Can you explain why/how this is mischief making by the opposition? What are they doing, paying off journalists from the WSJ to write derogatory remarks

[Reasonableman]

Speculation on all sides, it would appear. Perhaps no need for shock-horror "agenized" white-knight overkill, either, eh?

The focus seems to be the protocol surrounding delivery of the speech in Thai, and expecting non-Thais to sit through it without concurrent translation into their own language, is it not?

That does seem to be the issue. Nobody wants to stand around and listen to a seven minute speech in a language they don't understand. After handing out the translation, the Thai language speech was rather pointless. A real-time translation, subtitles, or making the speech in English all would have been better. Making the speech in Thai only serves to provide news clips for the electorate back home and annoy those who have to wait through it.

Good point.

Speaking to all the nice people in Thailand in a 7-minute soundbite, probably dictated the speech methodology, but spun negatively here, for purposes we can only speculate about.

Smart move!

[virtualtraveller]

Well, in Japan either you give the speech in Japanese, or make it in your own language with simultaneous Japanese translation. Of course, since English is the international business lingua fraca, and you know it fairly well since you studied in that language for 3 years, why not give it in that language (reading a proof read scripted speech written by a fluent English speaker isn't difficult). Seems incompetence on the part of the organisers (were they Thai or Japanese?). Journalist might seem to undermine her credibility but fact is she undermines her own credibility by being an inexperienced PM acting as a proxy.

[grantbkk]

Govt. raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech, #1^

A little Opposition mischief making again?

I suspect so.

In a backhanded way trying to diminish Ms. Y., knowing full well British born Abhi's language proficiency.

To highlight this little tidbit - a seven-minute speech for heaven's sake - says it all.

".............during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Complaining about not speaking English in a Japanese forumn....a bit of a reach.

For this 'diminishment' to have traction, it needed English language as the put-down.

"Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded"

This gets at a question of who's "motive"?

It is well known by many, that the foreign media socializes and lives in the world of the Amart, when in Thailand.

They have little understanding of the mostly unilingual world of the PTP/UDD/Red Shirts.

As a result, for example, when speaking to Europeans politically astute contacts, who nevertheless follow their domestic media reports on Thailand, it is often like talking to PADites.

So this instance of a foreign reporter dumping on Ms. Y, indicated to me he/she is following the impulses of her buddies.

"The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter.

And by inference, the unspoken agenda is to drive home the point that our buddy Abhi, wouldn't make this mistake.

Forgetting the little fact he couldn't win a Thai election, if his life depended on it.

Govt. raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech, #1^

A little Opposition mischief making again?

I suspect so.

In a backhanded way trying to diminish Ms. Y., knowing full well British born Abhi's language proficiency.

To highlight this little tidbit - a seven-minute speech for heaven's sake - says it all.

".............during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Complaining about not speaking English in a Japanese forumn....a bit of a reach.

For this 'diminishment' to have traction, it needed English language as the put-down.

"Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded"

This gets at a question of who's "motive"?

It is well known by many, that the foreign media socializes and lives in the world of the Amart, when in Thailand.

They have little understanding of the mostly unilingual world of the PTP/UDD/Red Shirts.

As a result, for example, when speaking to Europeans politically astute contacts, who nevertheless follow their domestic media reports on Thailand, it is often like talking to PADites.

So this instance of a foreign reporter dumping on Ms. Y, indicated to me he/she is following the impulses of her buddies.

"The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter.

And by inference, the unspoken agenda is to drive home the point that our buddy Abhi, wouldn't make this mistake.

Forgetting the little fact he couldn't win a Thai election, if his life depended on it.

What I got out of this topic is that the WSJ still exists. I have to agree with 'CalgaryII' about the motives for the theme of the article. Isn't about time the Democratic Party members get real jobs and try to do something positive rather than gear all their efforts to lining their pockets?

Maybe a little positive feed back once in a while. The whole mess reminds me of bickering children on a school grounds. Even the poor Thais (voters too) recognize the immature quibbling that goes on everyday. How can the Democrats ever be honestly elected if they continue to act like a bunch of privileged, spoiled children?

[mrtoad]

Is her brother banned from Japan? If not, why didn't he go and make the speech?

Neither can speak English very well, despite attending University overseas. Makes you wonder how they passed their respective courses.

[mrtoad]

Govt. raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech, #1^

A little Opposition mischief making again? I suspect so. In a backhanded way trying to diminish Ms. Y., knowing full well British born Abhi's language proficiency. To highlight this little tidbit - a seven-minute speech for heaven's sake - says it all.

".............during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Complaining about not speaking English in a Japanese forumn....a bit of a reach. For this 'diminishment' to have traction, it needed English language as the put-down.

"Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded"

This gets at a question of who's "motive"? It is well known by many, that the foreign media socializes and lives in the world of the Amart, when in Thailand. They have little understanding of the mostly unilingual world of the PTP/UDD/Red Shirts. As a result, for example, when speaking to Europeans politically astute contacts, who nevertheless follow their domestic media reports on Thailand, it is often like talking to PADites. So this instance of a foreign reporter dumping on Ms. Y, indicated to me he/she is following the impulses of her buddies.

"The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter.

And by inference, the unspoken agenda is to drive home the point that our buddy Abhi, wouldn't make this mistake. Forgetting the little fact he couldn't win a Thai election, if his life depended on it.

Seems quite a ridiculous conclusion. Can you explain why/how this is mischief making by the opposition? What are they doing, paying off journalists from the WSJ to write derogatory remarks

Have to admit, has to be one of the most ridiculous conclusions I've seen for a while. Clearly the effects of the Chang the previous night hasn't worn off. WSJ is hardly linked to the Dems, but they are making IMO a valid observation.

[Reasonableman]

Where are the complaints about the Newsweek Fearless rating? Newsweek is not biased, but WSJ is. Uncanny that they both take such an interest in influencing internal Thai politics.

[pimay11]

The reporter seemed to think that because she attended university in the USA Yingluck would be able to speak English. Poor misguided soul.

He should know better because she attended Kentucky State University.

[volk666]

As someone said earlier - they should have sent an e-mail, would have left a better impression on Japanese than watching her talking for seven minutes to them in a language they don't understand. This is just dumb, boring, and extremely unprofessional, even rude.

And her main point was to convince them to put trust in her promises that her government can protect their investments from flood? She should have at least made those promises in a language they understand.

It doesn't matter what her supporters feel about this - what matters is the effect she made on Japanese investors, and from another report it appeared they were not convinced even before this episode.

[OzMick]

Is her brother banned from Japan? If not, why didn't he go and make the speech?

Actually, he is banned from Japan being a convicted criminal. His recent visit was a result of special pleading by the Thai government.

..........which then denied asking, causing some embarrassment for the Japanese.

[OzMick]

Govt. raps WSJ criticism of PM's Thai-language speech, #1^

A little Opposition mischief making again? I suspect so. In a backhanded way trying to diminish Ms. Y., knowing full well British born Abhi's language proficiency. To highlight this little tidbit - a seven-minute speech for heaven's sake - says it all.

".............during her visit to Japan, after an article in The Wall Street Journal criticised Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra's decision not to address the audience in English.

Complaining about not speaking English in a Japanese forumn....a bit of a reach. For this 'diminishment' to have traction, it needed English language as the put-down.

"Thani also questioned the reporter's motive in writing the article. "I sincerely hope this is not the direction to be taken by a respected newspaper such as yours," he concluded"

This gets at a question of who's "motive"? It is well known by many, that the foreign media socializes and lives in the world of the Amart, when in Thailand. They have little understanding of the mostly unilingual world of the PTP/UDD/Red Shirts. As a result, for example, when speaking to Europeans politically astute contacts, who nevertheless follow their domestic media reports on Thailand, it is often like talking to PADites. So this instance of a foreign reporter dumping on Ms. Y, indicated to me he/she is following the impulses of her buddies.

"The report also noted that US-educated Yingluck could have chosen to speak in English. "It could be, though, that Ms Yingluck wasn't entirely confident in English. A video of her greeting visiting US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Thailand last year by saying 'overcome' instead of 'welcome' got heavy play on YouTube," wrote the reporter.

And by inference, the unspoken agenda is to drive home the point that our buddy Abhi, wouldn't make this mistake. Forgetting the little fact he couldn't win a Thai election, if his life depended on it.

Seems quite a ridiculous conclusion. Can you explain why/how this is mischief making by the opposition? What are they doing, paying off journalists from the WSJ to write derogatory remarks

As i remember paying journalists for the tone of their comments was a PTP tactic.

[OzMick]

Was the "fearless" woman afraid of making an English language mistake while reading from a script?

"Y'all come back now, hear."

[Xangsamhua]

If PM Yingluck had addressed the gathering in English there would have been minimal comprehension all round. The Japanese are worse than the Thais at English. Their average TOEFL scores are the lowest in Asia - 6 points behind the Thais on a 100-point scale (Internet-based test).

I don't see any objection to a Thai or any other national leader speaking in their own language if there is simultaneous translation available, which I gather there wasn't on this occasion. It appears her speech was a purely symbolic affair - a pointless ritual.

Believe me, brothers and sisters, the fact that someone has finished a Master's or Doctorate in the US doesn't mean they have good spoken English grammar or pronunciation, especially if they graduated some years ago. They can presumably read at a high level, and their writing can be edited. They may have very good listening comprehension, but their speaking can be awful.

I attended an Asian regional seminar two days ago in Bangkok, in which all presenters were from SE and East Asia, and all except one had doctorates, most from the States. Two of the main presenters (not from Thailand) were very hard to understand, and their discourse overall lacked coherence. I felt it would be so much better if they could speak in their native language and translation be made available. (Incidentally, the Thai speakers and the Lao speaker all spoke quite clearly and presented well, as did the Korean speaker.)

Edited March 10, 2012 by Xangsamhua