I love the Thai morning news:

It starts with the "anchorman" reading something in a monotonous way. And while he drones on and on and on (as voice over) we see the following:

1. man talking to camera wiping his eyes

2. crying woman being comforted by relatives

3. overweight policeman writing something into his notebook

4. long shot of a blurred object

5. a wrapped body being loaded into an ambulance

6. man talking to camera wiping his eyes

7. crying woman being comforted by relatives

8. overweight policeman writing something into his notebook

9. long shot of a blurred object

10 a wrapped body being loaded into an ambulance

11. man talking to camera wiping his eyes

12. see above

after 5 or 6 repetitions cut back to studio with more droning. Then off to next topic. A soi dog dug out of a sewer (another 5 shots repeated 5 times with droning from the studio).

But perhaps it is helpful if you want to understand "Thainess".

edit: just saw my sarcasm doesn't come out properly. I do not "enjoy" other people's grieve but I dislike how TV stations exploit it.

And it takes soooooo long to cover a minor story. The monk got 30 minutes every day last week. Meanwhile rice gets virtually nothing.

It's as though they try to be deliberately uninformative.

Now, there's a theory. Surely it ain't so, TV stations and govts colluding to mislead/misdirect public attention. Could such a thing ever happen?

(Just in case: sarcasm)

I have absolutely no doubt that that is the case. TV channels push agenda not news. Some have news, but there is little independent comment.

In the morning it gets as far as the female presenter nodding in agreement saying "ka" repeatedly.

Two things:

>>> Facebook is banned in China. Main reasons: it's too easy for regular people to post truth, and too difficult for Beijing iron-fisters to control.

>>> As a comparison; Nation newspaper has lead stories with large photos, such a man who puts on cardboard crown and fries bananas (an actual headline from last week's Nation)

Which is more drivelish? Facebook or print media?

That was my first thought as well. Social media like

Facebook and Twitter in essence completely bypass government

controlled media. It was the foundation of events leading up

to the Arab spring, and one need look no farther than China to see what a controlling government thinks of Facebook. ( They banned it.). If there ever is an actual revolution here where the poor people will rise up against the liege lords, instead of these silly military coups which are nothing more than controlling the new pigs at the feeding trough, then social media will be at the center of it......

I wonder how long it would be if some US citizen started writing on FB about bombing or Jihad or political assasination inside the USA, before the US Government started to take an interest ? Nothing by-passes the Government, would be my guess. Maybe US government takes a different approach than the Chinese, better to read peoples thoughts than to not know what people are thinking or planning.

Or it could be that the govt realises that most people in the usa and other more established democracies when they read the news on FB a:don't care B: don't believe it C: just start posting on the thread. It allows people to vent their anger online and many are satisfied by this, knowing a lot of people will read their views. Takes away feelings of powerless without actually changing anything. Pretty much the same way the Arab spring led to a lot of people feeling they were in control, yet nothing really changed except the faces at the top, but of course without the bloodshed and economic damage. I'm not saying social media prevents social change, it clearly aids it in that it helps people come together and arrange protest movements. However in places like the USA it has a different affect, it helps people feel they are having a say and for most people that's enough.

Yes. An interesting perspective.

As Andy Warhol once stated, Everyone will have their few minutes of "fame". Albeit as an FB blogger.

Two things:

>>> Facebook is banned in China. Main reasons: it's too easy for regular people to post truth, and too difficult for Beijing iron-fisters to control.

>>> As a comparison; Nation newspaper has lead stories with large photos, such a man who puts on cardboard crown and fries bananas (an actual headline from last week's Nation)

Which is more drivelish? Facebook or print media?

so you really think its harder to post truth and criticism on china government on other chinese social media site i.e digu, weibo?

look at the owner of digu, weibo, renren and you will find the main reason you listed is nothing but a big fat joke

They should get their news from a more serious source, like Americans do:

john-stewart-clapping.gif

If it weren't for Americans there would be no Facebook (or Google, Amazon, Ebay, or your computer or modem or router or an internet or your cell phone or smartphone or any software to run it with like Windows, Linux, Unix or Android.)

They should get their news from a more serious source, like Americans do:

john-stewart-clapping.gif

If it weren't for Americans there would be no Facebook (or Google, Amazon, Ebay, or your computer or modem or router or an internet or your cell phone or smartphone or any software to run it with like Windows, Linux, Unix or Android.)

Shssshh.....Don't ruin things for the American baiters..

Now we know why the Thais know nothing about Hitler.......they think today's news is a cat got stuck in a box.

They know about the cat in the box,

but sod all about Schrodinger's take on said cat.

terribly misleading title; Facebook was found to be most popular for young people, and overall TV news was the most popular. Surely the same in every country around the world; you get news on your feed from news organizations you follow.

Two things:

>>> Facebook is banned in China. Main reasons: it's too easy for regular people to post truth, and too difficult for Beijing iron-fisters to control.

>>> As a comparison; Nation newspaper has lead stories with large photos, such a man who puts on cardboard crown and fries bananas (an actual headline from last week's Nation)

Which is more drivelish? Facebook or print media?

1. Facebook is an American commercial enterprise. They have other platforms for social networking in China, run by Chinese companies who don't allow the NSA to collect data.

2. The Nation isn't in the newspaper of record.category. and Thais mostly read newspapers that are published in their language. There might be other countries with newspaper that put a large photo of a man making danish pastries on the front page. but that doesn't mean that the whole print media of such a country is "drivelish".

Ok.... maybe its me being an idiot, but what kind of news do you get on facebook. ( oh apart from what your mate has had for breakfast )??

I read Matichon and Prachatai there. The Guardian is available via Facebook and I assume pretty much all the major news outlets are too.

Do they have 'thepeoplesvoicedotorg?'

Another reason to ban FarceBook. People are calling it news now.

You can 'like' many different news organizations on facebook (including TV). It then creates a feed of sorts. I generally use ZITE or REDDIT for my news though.

My real dislike is FARCEBOOK as I have seen several guys be at work, viewed their wives or GF FarceBook page, then went wild wanting to go home. Farcebook would be good if people used it in a correct manner. Problem is Human Manure as Trink would say.