I am appalled that ThaiVisa reposts a news article that names a rape victim without first removing the name of the rape victim. Why do you think this is acceptable? It is against the norms of most countries, including Thailand. Indeed, is it even legal? Has this been done before? Will it continue to be your policy?

News articles are posted intact and unmodified as is standard practice pretty much anywhere. Modifying content of an article in itself can be considered a violation of copyright laws. It is already in the media where the article came from and available via the source link in our topics and as such public knowledge already.

If it is indeed illegal or unacceptable to remove a rape victim's name in this scenario, it is perfectly legal to simply not repost such a transgressing article…or to repost an alternative article, if available, that does not create such a dilemma.

From the Thai Constitution at http://www.oic.go.th/content_eng/digital.htm

A persons family right, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy shall be protected.

The assertion or circulation of a statement or picture in any manner whatsoever to the public, which violates or affects a person’s family rights, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy, shall not be made except for the case which is beneficial to the public.

If it is indeed illegal or unacceptable to remove a rape victim's name in this scenario, it is perfectly legal to simply not repost such a transgressing article…or to repost an alternative article, if available, that does not create such a dilemma.

So you do not believe in free speech or free press.

I certainly do not believe in unlimited, unfettered, free press or speech. I also believe that the rape victim could take action against this forum since the law of this land also does not permit unlimited free speech or press without consequences.

Edit: Furthermore, Harry, you can read this story in Bangkok Post without the identification of the rape victim. Is their story any the poorer for not having the poor woman identified now and for all time?

Edited February 17, 201313 yr by Khonwan

I certainly do not believe in unlimited, unfettered, free press or speech. I also believe that the rape victim could take action against this forum since the law of this land also does not permit unlimited free speech or press without consequences.

There would be legal wiggle room with "beneficial to the public". All the media in Thailand quotes adult victims names.

I was unaware that adult rape victims are named here – I cannot recall any case in the past. I would challenge anyone to support with reason how the naming of such victims could be beneficial to the public – I’m not shooting you, Simple1, as the messenger. Despite this, there is no reason to promote this victim’s name. Well done to Bangkok Post for their ethics on this subject.

I certainly do not believe in unlimited, unfettered, free press or speech. I also believe that the rape victim could take action against this forum since the law of this land also does not permit unlimited free speech or press without consequences.

There would be legal wiggle room with "beneficial to the public". All the media in Thailand quotes adult victims names.

And sometimes addresses too, which I've always found rather odd.

I certainly do not believe in unlimited, unfettered, free press or speech. I also believe that the rape victim could take action against this forum since the law of this land also does not permit unlimited free speech or press without consequences.

Edit: Furthermore, Harry, you can read this story in Bangkok Post without the identification of the rape victim. Is their story any the poorer for not having the poor woman identified now and for all time?

The article quoted is the not the one in Bangkok Post. BP does not allow its articles to be used. It is quite legitimate not to change existing articles and in fact breach of copyright to do so.

From the Thai Constitution at http://www.oic.go.th...eng/digital.htm

A persons family right, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy shall be protected.

The assertion or circulation of a statement or picture in any manner whatsoever to the public, which violates or affects a person’s family rights, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy, shall not be made except for the case which is beneficial to the public.

So much for the Thai Constitution - the Press violate this on a daily basis then.,..sad

Harry, it would be funny were it not so serious to read you and Admin here insisting how improper it would be to edit the article and yet ignoring how improper it is to publish her identity. You folk are very selective in your ethics.

As Admin have stated on other threads, when a Bangkok Post article has in fact been used, there exists a right of limited use (fair usage) of any copyrighted article from anyone including Bangkok Post so long as it is only partially quoted and that the source is provided or linked to.

To insist that the article that was used could not have been changed is totally misleading. It is permissible to quote the article up to but excluding the identity then add a device such as, “and the article continued”…

Once again, I wish to state that ThaiVisa were not compelled to repost this story at all; I have not found its inclusion in The Nation. There are a great many articles from other sources that are never reposted for a variety of reasons.

Despite Simple1’s second post, I’m inclined to believe, as does Andrew Drummond (source: his website), that publishing the name is in fact illegal. The fact that illegal acts are committed in Thailand with impunity should surprise no one living here. (To be fair to Simple1, his second post did not refute that it was illegal – it only stated that it is common here; indeed his first post indicates the law that has probably been broken. I could quote the codes from the penal code but that seems unnecessary.)

Thaivisa is a vehicle and not the author of the articles and as such complaints should be addressed to the media sources themselves.

Some countries it is specifically written in the law, such as England, India. The US for example it is not written into law except for a few states. Even then, the supreme court has overturned convictions of media printing victims names. At least in the US it is at the discretion of the publishers as to whether print or not. Thailand, it is not so clear as it is open to interpretation due to the ambiguity of the law.

The statistics are such that around 10% of media say under no circumstances should it be allowed, 40% under permission or request by the victim and 40% on special circumstances. But these are ethical issues and not legal in those cases. And it is hotly debated in many circles with pros and cons and the central point being the 'stigma' of such disclosures and the other side freedom of expression and the right of the public to know. Sticky wicket for sure.

As for your "continued" here comment. Some articles we are allowed to post in full and others require following fair use.

I'm sure your concern will be looked at by other admins but at the moment my previous post stands. We do not write the news, only present it.

Tywais, this is a more constructive post and I thank you for it. This additional damage has now been done already to this young woman but I would like to think that your decision to repost “as is” in the future will be made with a much greater regard to the victim rather than the puerile interest of your readers. After all, how can it possibly be of any relevant, constructive, interest to a reader, or to the general public, to know the rape victim’s name? And I do keep stressing “rape victim” rather than “victim” since I, and many others, see a distinction in gravity and sensitivity between the group and the sub-group. Freedom of the press carries with it a huge responsibility – please do not allow this website to reduce itself to the standards of the News of the World.

Next time, Mods & Admin…please do the right thing.

Thaivisa is a vehicle and not the author of the articles and as such complaints should be addressed to the media sources themselves.

Some countries it is specifically written in the law, such as England, India. The US for example it is not written into law except for a few states. Even then, the supreme court has overturned convictions of media printing victims names. At least in the US it is at the discretion of the publishers as to whether print or not. Thailand, it is not so clear as it is open to interpretation due to the ambiguity of the law.

The statistics are such that around 10% of media say under no circumstances should it be allowed, 40% under permission or request by the victim and 40% on special circumstances. But these are ethical issues and not legal in those cases. And it is hotly debated in many circles with pros and cons and the central point being the 'stigma' of such disclosures and the other side freedom of expression and the right of the public to know. Sticky wicket for sure.

As for your "continued" here comment. Some articles we are allowed to post in full and others require following fair use.

I'm sure your concern will be looked at by other admins but at the moment my previous post stands. We do not write the news, only present it.

Pleased the admin team will look into this and perhaps take a more ethical view in future, because your initial stance comes across as a bit of a cop out......in my opinion

Tywais, this is a more constructive post and I thank you for it. This additional damage has now been done already to this young woman but I would like to think that your decision to repost “as is” in the future will be made with a much greater regard to the victim rather than the puerile interest of your readers. After all, how can it possibly be of any relevant, constructive, interest to a reader, or to the general public, to know the rape victim’s name? And I do keep stressing “rape victim” rather than “victim” since I, and many others, see a distinction in gravity and sensitivity between the group and the sub-group. Freedom of the press carries with it a huge responsibility – please do not allow this website to reduce itself to the standards of the News of the World.

Next time, Mods & Admin…please do the right thing.

I would like to bring to the attention of OP that forum admins cannot be required to know each and every law or to filter each and every news story that gets reposted as a consequence of an automated process.

Also, bear in mind that censoring news always leaves a bad aftertaste. In case of a rape victim, I agree that the name of the victim probably doesn't matter much.

But take for example the case of some violent assaults, when an original news story that should have read "three young nationals from XYZ origin raped a 14 year old girl" became "three young nationals assaulted a girl" in an effort to "shape" the news in a way that would not further exacerbate xenophoby, supposedly for the "higher good". My opinion is that hiding the truth is a disservice to democracy. If some specific groups of immigrants cause trouble, people have the right to know about it and that groups have to be dealt with.

This happened in France, and I consider that kind of "news shaping" to be a form of treason.

Another point is concealing from the news the names of people that were pickpocketed by ladyboys at 3 am on Pattaya beach road. I hope you support hiding their names as well, because the consequences for them could be very serious as well.

Edited February 17, 201313 yr by manarak

Tywais, this is a more constructive post and I thank you for it. This additional damage has now been done already to this young woman but I would like to think that your decision to repost “as is” in the future will be made with a much greater regard to the victim rather than the puerile interest of your readers. After all, how can it possibly be of any relevant, constructive, interest to a reader, or to the general public, to know the rape victim’s name? And I do keep stressing “rape victim” rather than “victim” since I, and many others, see a distinction in gravity and sensitivity between the group and the sub-group. Freedom of the press carries with it a huge responsibility – please do not allow this website to reduce itself to the standards of the News of the World.

Next time, Mods & Admin…please do the right thing.

I would like to bring to the attention of OP that forum admins cannot be required to know each and every law or to filter each and every news story that gets reposted as a consequence of an automated process.

Also, bear in mind that censoring news always leaves a bad aftertaste. In case of a rape victim, I agree that the name of the victim probably doesn't matter much.

But take for example the case of some violent assaults, when an original news story that should have read "three young nationals from XYZ origin raped a 14 year old girl" became "three young nationals assaulted a girl" in an effort to "shape" the news in a way that would not further exacerbate xenophoby, supposedly for the "higher good". My opinion is that hiding the truth is a disservice to democracy. If some specific groups of immigrants cause trouble, people have the right to know about it and that groups have to be dealt with.

This happened in France, and I consider that kind of "news shaping" to be a form of treason.

Another point is concealing from the news the names of people that were pickpocketed by ladyboys at 3 am on Pattaya beach road. I hope you support hiding their names as well, because the consequences for them could be very serious as well.

No need to allow posting of the victims name, disgusting .....

Double standards, when you don`t allow naming and shaming yet allow drawing attention to a victim of a dreadful crime....shame on you, 2 wrongs don`t make a right..

Tywais, this is a more constructive post and I thank you for it. This additional damage has now been done already to this young woman but I would like to think that your decision to repost “as is” in the future will be made with a much greater regard to the victim rather than the puerile interest of your readers. After all, how can it possibly be of any relevant, constructive, interest to a reader, or to the general public, to know the rape victim’s name? And I do keep stressing “rape victim” rather than “victim” since I, and many others, see a distinction in gravity and sensitivity between the group and the sub-group. Freedom of the press carries with it a huge responsibility – please do not allow this website to reduce itself to the standards of the News of the World.

Next time, Mods & Admin…please do the right thing.

I would like to bring to the attention of OP that forum admins cannot be required to know each and every law or to filter each and every news story that gets reposted as a consequence of an automated process.

Also, bear in mind that censoring news always leaves a bad aftertaste. In case of a rape victim, I agree that the name of the victim probably doesn't matter much.

But take for example the case of some violent assaults, when an original news story that should have read "three young nationals from XYZ origin raped a 14 year old girl" became "three young nationals assaulted a girl" in an effort to "shape" the news in a way that would not further exacerbate xenophoby, supposedly for the "higher good". My opinion is that hiding the truth is a disservice to democracy. If some specific groups of immigrants cause trouble, people have the right to know about it and that groups have to be dealt with.

This happened in France, and I consider that kind of "news shaping" to be a form of treason.

Another point is concealing from the news the names of people that were pickpocketed by ladyboys at 3 am on Pattaya beach road. I hope you support hiding their names as well, because the consequences for them could be very serious as well.

No need to allow posting of the victims name, disgusting .....

Double standards, when you don`t allow naming and shaming yet allow drawing attention to a victim of a dreadful crime....shame on you, 2 wrongs don`t make a right..

I meant the name doesn't matter much as in: "it can be left out"

Yes, Manarak, I agree with your points, except for your opening sentence. I too do not support shaping the news – leaving out the name certainly does not qualify as that. And yes, I too would leave out the names of victims of other sensitive crimes where no purpose is served by their inclusion – and I can think of no purpose. I see no point in causing harm to another without good reason.

As to your opening sentence, by Tywais' response it is plain to see that the team were aware of the controversy over identification of rape victims so your point does not apply here; as to the reposting being an automated process – you must be joking: that would certainly be no grounds for defence were a supposed automated process lead to the reposting of a lese majeste article!

Edit: I should add, in reply to Tywais, that I did in fact complain to the news source before complaining to ThaiVisa. Now that I note his post received a “Like” from George, let me point out that I do not buy into the excuse, “Thaivisa is a vehicle and not the author of the articles”. In a case of libel or lese majeste this vehicle would be found guilty along with the original publisher. You simply cannot hide behind this statement…nor should you. ThaiVisa chose to be the vehicle for this article.

Edited February 18, 201313 yr by Khonwan

As question has been asked and answered this thread is closed.