Did the Nation ask any questions / do any investigative journalism to try to discover who pushed the TV channel / producers to make changes?

If the Nation had done so, and mentioned specifically what they discovered etc., the story would have some real clout. Typical Nation poor joutnalism .

The Nation is muted by the PTP/TRT.

Your sources?

Jesus guys it's a fictional soap, lets get this into perspective here, as far as I can see all the government has done is draw unwanted attention to themselves and probably made this program more popular than ever, I don't think there is any doubt who interefered with the broadcast either - any numpty could work that out.

Of course it could also be argued that Thai politics is just one big soap - difference being it isn't fictional, maybe the Thai population have trouble working out which one is which lol

Did the Nation ask any questions / do any investigative journalism to try to discover who pushed the TV channel / producers to make changes?

If the Nation had done so, and mentioned specifically what they discovered etc., the story would have some real clout. Typical Nation poor joutnalism .

The story is almost identical in the other newspaper. No journalist or newspaper can identify the source of the warning for fear of a defamation charge. Typical shoot the messenger.

PM's Office Minister Varathep Ratanakorn, who oversees Channel 3's concession, said earlier that he could confirm there had been no such order from the government.

It was merely a suggestion.

Unless I missed it - has there actually been an explanation given as to why the show was pulled, all I'm reading in the OP is the government is denying involvement

So why was it abandoned then ?

Read the other newspaper and you will find out. Btw - My advice to the “politicians”: Provide more drugs to the streets so you can switch off reality in this country too, which is (at least in the political arena) far worse than any soap opera!

Maybe the programme was s**t and they just pulled it to save their ratings and advertising revenue.

I have a lot of Thai friends here in NZ, I can confirm that it is very popular with them. I would assume that they are a fair sample of other Thais in Thailand as well. They like the way that creativity has been used to tell a near-truth view of what the Political situation in Thailand is at the moment. They all believe that the early termination of the show is due to Political pressure by the Poo Yais. Poo Poo to them. Poo Yais normally always act with self sustaining interests at hand.

My girlfriend sat with me over lunch today, introducing me to each fictional character, and matching them up with their factual doppelganger. It is the fact that this is too close to the truth, that has caused such a stir by the Poo Yais. As we know, Thais do not take offense without response. And Thailand is known as a major censor to press freedom and programming censorship.

The PM may not be directly responsible, probably because she met the minister of "TV watching" in a hotel room somewhere on the back streets of Krung Thep, and after close consultation, she persuaded him under duress that he should be the one to make the call. The statement that the PM had nothing to do with it is simpl ensuring that someone else bites the bullet if a culprit is implicated in the bullying.

The slight problem with your analysis and with due respect to your intelligent sounding informants in the Thai diaspora in NZ - is that it is completely untrue.It seems the show was pulled by Channel 3 itself without any pressure from the government because it touched on LM material and other sensitive political references.

Did the Nation ask any questions / do any investigative journalism to try to discover who pushed the TV channel / producers to make changes?

If the Nation had done so, and mentioned specifically what they discovered etc., the story would have some real clout. Typical Nation poor joutnalism .

I share your frustration, but as Ken has said, in cases like this, it's one things getting to the truth, but another thing actually printing it. If you were a journalist, and it was you and your family potentially liable to be taken to the cleaners for millions of baht in defamation, would you chance it?

The slight problem with your analysis and with due respect to your intelligent sounding informants in the Thai diaspora in NZ - is that it is completely untrue.It seems the show was pulled by Channel 3 itself without any pressure from the government because it touched on LM material and other sensitive political references.

After boldly, not to mention rather rudely, dismissing someone else's theory as being completely untrue, i was expecting your own theory to begin on a somewhat more confident footing than, "It seems...".

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources

This is a discussion forum most of what is written here is conjecture and opinion based on what we have read - the news report says the government claims to have had nothing to do with it - some may believe that and some may not - personally I don't believe it because I don't believe most of what this government tells people - that is up to me, some may agree or disagree that is up to them I don't really care - and even if someone produced a source how do you know that is true either

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources

This is a discussion forum most of what is written here is conjecture and opinion based on what we have read

I have a bigger laugh at people who make claims but can't back them up. The forum actually has a rule against members posting wild, unsubstantiated claims. Of course, that rule is violated a thousand times a day by people who like to drivel in cyberspace with the first thing that comes to mind--whether it matches reality or not. You want credibility along with your opinion? Back it up!

According to the "other newspaper" the show revolved around the actions of a prime minister, who is "already dead and possessed by an evil necromancer" [who supposedly directs him from afar]. The other protagonist was a corrupt-to-the-bone deputy prime minister. And the show reportedly also featured a "special investigation unit called TSI".

Perhaps the storyline hit a little too close to home and the producers forgot to include the disclaimer "All individuals and institutions depicted in this show are fictional. Any similarities with real-life persons, whether alive or dead, or institutions are purely coincidential and unintentional."

So it was a documentary. I expect the viewers were bored since the end of the story.

The rich politicians get away with it.

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources . . . .

. . . . and even if someone produced a source how do you know that is true either

You do what's called "due diligence." Pretty easy to do in this technological age, with search engines, and all.

If you don't know the term "due diligence," watch a couple of crime dramas, court dramas, or The Discovery Channel (The Mythbusters might be a good start). Debate 101.

Did the Nation ask any questions / do any investigative journalism to try to discover who pushed the TV channel / producers to make changes?

If the Nation had done so, and mentioned specifically what they discovered etc., the story would have some real clout. Typical Nation poor joutnalism .

I share your frustration, but as Ken has said, in cases like this, it's one things getting to the truth, but another thing actually printing it. If you were a journalist, and it was you and your family potentially liable to be taken to the cleaners for millions of baht in defamation, would you chance it?

You can dress up any report in any way to avoid defamation. They don't even bother to ask the questions. the owners are compete pussies with zero principles.

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources

This is a discussion forum most of what is written here is conjecture and opinion based on what we have read

I have a bigger laugh at people who make claims but can't back them up. The forum actually has a rule against members posting wild, unsubstantiated claims. Of course, that rule is violated a thousand times a day by people who like to drivel in cyberspace with the first thing that comes to mind--whether it matches reality or not. You want credibility along with your opinion? Back it up!

not correct, the forum has rules about people posting claimed facts when in fact they aren't and cannot be supported, that is entirely different than expressing an opinion, if you can't understand the difference then I'm not sure what you are doing here in a "discussion forum" JMO

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources . . . .

. . . . and even if someone produced a source how do you know that is true either

You do what's called "due diligence." Pretty easy to do in this technological age, with search engines, and all.

If you don't know the term "due diligence," watch a couple of crime dramas, court dramas, or The Discovery Channel (The Mythbusters might be a good start). Debate 101.

Due diligence on stories & articles in Thailand? I hope you're joking but suspect you're not. Anything to do with politics here is murky and providing links to others' opinions is not in any way a confirmation of the truth.

Where is the source of true facts? Mostly it doesn't exist. This is a forum for posting expats' opinion & one persons (subjective opinion of) 'wild unsubstantiated claims' is another's honestly held opinion.

I have a laugh at people on here looking for sources

This is a discussion forum most of what is written here is conjecture and opinion based on what we have read

I have a bigger laugh at people who make claims but can't back them up. The forum actually has a rule against members posting wild, unsubstantiated claims. Of course, that rule is violated a thousand times a day by people who like to drivel in cyberspace with the first thing that comes to mind--whether it matches reality or not. You want credibility along with your opinion? Back it up!

not correct, the forum has rules about people posting claimed facts when in fact they aren't and cannot be supported, that is entirely different than expressing an opinion, if you can't understand the difference then I'm not sure what you are doing here in a "discussion forum" JMO

On the contrary, I am afraid you are seriously confusing the difference between unsubstantiated claims and opinions.

The latter requires the use of "opinion words" ("I think," "I believe," "I suppose," and a hundred other signal words.) When someone says bluntly, "The Nation is muffled by the Red Shirts," (or similar), that is an unsubstantiated claim. Again, Debate 101.

Due diligence on stories & articles in Thailand?

You said that. I didn't. None of the words after "due diligence" are mine.

Due diligence on stories & articles in Thailand?

You said that. I didn't. None of the words after "due diligence" are mine.

Is that some sort of smartarse comment? You mentioned 'due diligence' so what do you mean?

During the 1st Thaksin "government" at least one newspaper which had been critical of the man received a phone call saying they were no longer to receive lucrative advertisements and would not get them back until they played nice. All denied of course.

Here, as in other countries, a government denial is tantamount to an admission of guilt

During the 1st Thaksin "government" at least one newspaper which had been critical of the man received a phone call saying they were no longer to receive lucrative advertisements and would not get them back until they played nice. All denied of course.

Here, as in other countries, a government denial is tantamount to an admission of guilt

I know nothing of the kind, I'm having difficulties to believe our fugitive criminal self-exile former PM would do such a thing

2005-10-05

"Prime minister files criminal and civil lawsuits against two journalists

Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has filed criminal and civil lawsuits against media tycoon Sondhi Limthongkul and demanded 500 million baht (over US$12 million) in damages for slander in Sondhi's banned political talk show."

http://www.ifex.org/...s_criminal_and/

2005-10-12

"Shin Corp lawsuit created "climate of fear," media activist tells Bangkok Criminal Court"

http://www.ifex.org/...reated_climate/

2007-07-27

"THAILAND: Thai reporter wins unfair dismissal case"

http://www.asiamedia...?parentid=74725

Maybe the programme was s**t and they just pulled it to save their ratings and advertising revenue.

How would you know ? My Thai friends were in fact following this soap avidly due to its unusually full-on handling of corruption topics.

Many Thai people were gripped by this rare dramatic treatment of corruption in politics - and those that have tried to translate its story-line to me have been proud that it existed on mainstream Thai TV. They didn't dream it would be pulled.

Edited January 5, 201313 yr by crazydrummerpauly

I went out tonite - fact

to watch some exciting (my opinion) FA football - fact

I had a wonderfull time - my opinion

I drank 14 beers - fact

west ham played very well - my opinion

the score was 2-2 fact

Fookhaht - do we all need to continue with this for your benefit or can you grasp the concept of discussion - are you so mentally challenged that you need a every poster to describe the conversation flow in such detail - honestly

Maybe the programme was s**t and they just pulled it to save their ratings and advertising revenue.

It's a Thai soap. Being s**t would be raising the bar.

Many Thai people were gripped by this rare dramatic treatment of corruption in politics - and those that have tried to translate its story-line to me have been proud that it existed on mainstream Thai TV. They didn't dream it would be pulled.

It's been announced the National Broadcasting Commission is to meet on Mon 07 Jan to find out who stopped the show ! As if this will prove anything, they will "find" exactly what they're told to and report accordingly

The Topic continues here.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/609854-concern-over-content-behind-axing-of-drama/