Video Special: Bangkok 'shutdown': protesters fill streets of Thai capital

[mca]

Shouting out loud does not make what they are saying correct. It just reinforces that they are ignorant of what true democracy really is.

I think the best way to solve the crisis once and for all is to have a rant off between the anti government and pro government speakers. Winner take all. Get some of the panel from Thailands Got Talent and score them out of ten from hyperbole, shouting, hysterical rambling and making the most ludicrous threats against the opposition.

[spare5]

Scathing report looking down on these idiots with the disdain they deserve.

Good to see Sutheps English skills are on a par with his tactical nous. Absolute moron, whilst Abhisit is equally repulsive at least the guy has brains.

PMS mai?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Please don't insult Suthep English ability.

Unless Suthep bought that inkjet printout from Khao San Road, he actually graduated from Middle Tennessee State University of United State of America.

And what state university did Thaksin & Yingluck been too?

Yingluck grew up in Chiang Mai and attended Regina Coeli College, a private girls school, at the lower secondary level and then Yupparaj College, a co-ed school, at the upper secondary level. She graduated with a BA degree from the Faculty of Political Science and Public Administration, Chiang Mai University in 1988 and received a MPA degree (specialization in Management Information Systems) from Kentucky State University in 1991.

Do I see a correlation here?

Both (Suthep & Yingluck) graduate from State University of United State of America.

No wonder they say UK Universities (like Mark & Korn from Oxford) are better.

[thai4me]

This is getting absurd shutting down government installations.

[Cnxforever]

most of the Western "news" is being told what to report by Thaksin's supporters in their countries (corporate interests).

O god Thaskin runs channel 4 in the UK now . <deleted> is there anything he doesnt control? Global warming too no doubt the wee bastard.

The reality is Thaskin in monetary and political terms is a global lightweight and has zero influence outside Thailand and a few random spots. The combined wealth and power of the elite backing the yellows far exceeds anything he can dream of.

Western countries report like this because the train of thought is democracy is King. If some little corrupt politican in Thailand wants to end it he wont be seen favourably.

I agree that Thaksin himself does not run channel 4 or other news outlets. It's who profits from Thaksin's business arrangements that do, though. Thaksin has sold out Thai national interests to international corporate interests, and that is who controls the media. That's what you've missed. This isn't so much about Thaksin as it is about corporatism and globalist corporations.

you sound like the xenophobic Thai right wing - they where to stupid to have the vision to launch a satellite themselves and when Thaksin did and sold his company later they came crying "national interest" "national security" . Nothing was national in this sale - it was privately founded company traded on the stock exchange!

So what Thai national interest has Thaksin sold to international corporate interest who controls the media?

This as absolutely ridiculous!

If it would be up to the people you quote here about "national interest" you would be sitting at your home now watching stupid Thai soaps and game shows from an old fashioned antenna on top of your TV on a channel owned by the army !

Because it is not so long ago that private households where not allowed to have satellite dishes for "national security reasons" in Thailand pushed by the very same people in uniform who started this "national interest" nonsense after Thaksin sold his companies.

[toybits]

Ha ha... Looks like there will be a battle of the loudspeakers coming up. I will make sure to have a sound proof bunker before that happens. What will be the criteria for judging? Will Mr. Suthep be the one to make those criteria as well? Uh oh!!! Looks like we are back in square one.

ha ha...

Shouting out loud does not make what they are saying correct. It just reinforces that they are ignorant of what true democracy really is.

I think the best way to solve the crisis once and for all is to have a rant off between the anti government and pro government speakers. Winner take all. Get some of the panel from Thailands Got Talent and score them out of ten from hyperbole, shouting, hysterical rambling and making the most ludicrous threats against the opposition.

[toybits]

Double Post..

Edited January 14, 2014 by toybits

[gerry1011]

The truth. Only the truth...

Nothing more to add.

Thanks to this journalist to make the world know more about the insane plans of Suthep.

By the way... The speaker on the stage seems particularly insane...

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Would be nice for someone to reveal the "truth" behind the PTP regime.

Does Yingluck or her brother run the country?

What is the real amount of loss on the rice scheme?

Where has all the money gone that's been spent to date - rice scheme. flood management, expensive clocks etc - whose benefited?

When will Yingluck answer the Ombudsman about illegally issuing a passport to her brother?

Why are so many unqualified family relations considered appropriate for key jobs or simply on the payroll for not doing anything?

Who paid for all the trips for various PTP people to meet overseas with their strategic thinker?

Why did PTP try to cheat bills through parliament when they have a big majority of seats?

etc etc etc

Now this would make a fascinating piece of journalism.

Why does the guy on the stage seem particularly insane?

You think that he is really crazy?

It's quite fascinating too

Sent from my iPhone...

[JAG]

I don't know about painting the demonstrators in a bad light, but that shouty fellow with the dodgy dyed hair who asked to be interviewed seems to have poured a bucket of the stuff over himself!

Sobering thought really that if Suthep and his mates get their way he could be one of " the good people".

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[mca]

The good doctor reminds me of that crazy Asian dude from the Hangover film series. Its uncanny

[newcomer71]

Post deleted

Edited January 15, 2014 by newcomer71

[manarak]

Post deleted

the broadcast deliberately portrays the claims of the pink and blue clad speaker as lunatic, completely avoiding looking behind the scenes to know if what he said actually made sense or not.

the journalist is not doing his job properly. Journalists should at first help interviewees to explain their point instead of confronting them.

Only once the opinion has been clearly explained, the journalist can confront them with facts and other opinions to collect statements from the interviewees about that.

[newcomer71]

Post deleted

the broadcast deliberately portrays the claims of the pink and blue clad speaker as lunatic, completely avoiding looking behind the scenes to know if what he said actually made sense or not.

the journalist is not doing his job properly. Journalists should at first help interviewees to explain their point instead of confronting them.

Only once the opinion has been clearly explained, the journalist can confront them with facts and other opinions to collect statements from the interviewees about that.

I see it in a different way: the journailst made a good job in doing questions that the prone Thai "journalists" would never make. And I am not talking just about this case, but about "interviews" made by Thai media to both sides personalities.

The fact that the guy on stage became irritated is because he could never think that the journalist he invited to interview him could make some light on some controversial point... Became nervous, irritated, angry and cut the interview...

I did not see any foul question, but only someone so self confident, losing it all because the questions were more smart than he expected.

Here you can find the full interview that shows journalist DID NOT start with Yingluck question.

http://blogs.channel4.com/world-news-blog/flambuoyant-duelling-heart-thailands-protests/26695

And let's keep in mind Channel 4 is an independent source news.

[manarak]

Post deleted

the broadcast deliberately portrays the claims of the pink and blue clad speaker as lunatic, completely avoiding looking behind the scenes to know if what he said actually made sense or not.

the journalist is not doing his job properly. Journalists should at first help interviewees to explain their point instead of confronting them.

Only once the opinion has been clearly explained, the journalist can confront them with facts and other opinions to collect statements from the interviewees about that.

I see it in a different way: the journailst made a good job in doing questions that the prone Thai "journalists" would never make. And I am not talking just about this case, but about "interviews" made by Thai media to both sides personalities.

The fact that the guy on stage became irritated is because he could never think that the journalist he invited to interview him could make some light on some controversial point... Became nervous, irritated, angry and cut the interview...

I did not see any foul question, but only someone so self confident, losing it all because the questions were more smart than he expected.

Here you can find the full interview that shows journalist DID NOT start with Yingluck question.

http://blogs.channel4.com/world-news-blog/flambuoyant-duelling-heart-thailands-protests/26695

And let's keep in mind Channel 4 is an independent source news.

Does channel 4 broadcast interviews done by Thai journalists?

The problem is simply that the viewers will only see this broadcast and not the full picture. Therefore it's not good journalism.

The blog you linked does not say anything about the interview being longer than what was show on video.

News sources can be independent and still fail to report accurately.

Edited January 15, 2014 by manarak

[newcomer71]

Post deleted

the broadcast deliberately portrays the claims of the pink and blue clad speaker as lunatic, completely avoiding looking behind the scenes to know if what he said actually made sense or not.

the journalist is not doing his job properly. Journalists should at first help interviewees to explain their point instead of confronting them.

Only once the opinion has been clearly explained, the journalist can confront them with facts and other opinions to collect statements from the interviewees about that.

I see it in a different way: the journailst made a good job in doing questions that the prone Thai "journalists" would never make. And I am not talking just about this case, but about "interviews" made by Thai media to both sides personalities.

The fact that the guy on stage became irritated is because he could never think that the journalist he invited to interview him could make some light on some controversial point... Became nervous, irritated, angry and cut the interview...

I did not see any foul question, but only someone so self confident, losing it all because the questions were more smart than he expected.

Here you can find the full interview that shows journalist DID NOT start with Yingluck question.

http://blogs.channel4.com/world-news-blog/flambuoyant-duelling-heart-thailands-protests/26695

And let's keep in mind Channel 4 is an independent source news.

Does channel 4 broadcast interviews done by Thai journalists?

The problem is simply that the viewers will only see this broadcast and not the full picture. Therefore it's not good journalism.

The blog you linked does not say anything about the interview being longer than what was show on video.

News sources can be independent and still fail to report accurately.

Look the video in the blog. It's the full interview footage, I cannot link the video directly here.

By the way, I respect your opinion but just don't agree

[manarak]

the broadcast deliberately portrays the claims of the pink and blue clad speaker as lunatic, completely avoiding looking behind the scenes to know if what he said actually made sense or not.

the journalist is not doing his job properly. Journalists should at first help interviewees to explain their point instead of confronting them.

Only once the opinion has been clearly explained, the journalist can confront them with facts and other opinions to collect statements from the interviewees about that.

I see it in a different way: the journailst made a good job in doing questions that the prone Thai "journalists" would never make. And I am not talking just about this case, but about "interviews" made by Thai media to both sides personalities.

The fact that the guy on stage became irritated is because he could never think that the journalist he invited to interview him could make some light on some controversial point... Became nervous, irritated, angry and cut the interview...

I did not see any foul question, but only someone so self confident, losing it all because the questions were more smart than he expected.

Here you can find the full interview that shows journalist DID NOT start with Yingluck question.

http://blogs.channel4.com/world-news-blog/flambuoyant-duelling-heart-thailands-protests/26695

And let's keep in mind Channel 4 is an independent source news.

Does channel 4 broadcast interviews done by Thai journalists?

The problem is simply that the viewers will only see this broadcast and not the full picture. Therefore it's not good journalism.

The blog you linked does not say anything about the interview being longer than what was show on video.

News sources can be independent and still fail to report accurately.

Look the video in the blog. It's the full interview footage, I cannot link the video directly here.

By the way, I respect your opinion but just don't agree

What is your opinion about what is good journalism? is it that it's ok for journalists to not explain anything and to slam people they don't agree with?

The video on the blog you linked to has a length of 3 minutes 58, which is actually shorter than the video posted at the beginning of this thread.

[pipkins]

Very Sloppy journalism today. The turn out was drastically down again today. But i suppose they don't want the sheep to be rattled by facts do they.

What is suthep telling the 2,000 he has there now... the other 7,998,000 are wearing the latest Harry Potter invisibility cloaks.

That Seri guy lost it and showed the world (the ones who didn't already know) just what nutcases pass as political leaders over here. How anybody can blame the Journalist for his hissy fit is beyond me. Simply put he had no valid points to make, no class, do decorum and relied on childish mob chanting to try and regain some face.

[newcomer71]

I see it in a different way: the journailst made a good job in doing questions that the prone Thai "journalists" would never make. And I am not talking just about this case, but about "interviews" made by Thai media to both sides personalities.

The fact that the guy on stage became irritated is because he could never think that the journalist he invited to interview him could make some light on some controversial point... Became nervous, irritated, angry and cut the interview...

I did not see any foul question, but only someone so self confident, losing it all because the questions were more smart than he expected.

Here you can find the full interview that shows journalist DID NOT start with Yingluck question.

http://blogs.channel4.com/world-news-blog/flambuoyant-duelling-heart-thailands-protests/26695

And let's keep in mind Channel 4 is an independent source news.

Does channel 4 broadcast interviews done by Thai journalists?

The problem is simply that the viewers will only see this broadcast and not the full picture. Therefore it's not good journalism.

The blog you linked does not say anything about the interview being longer than what was show on video.

News sources can be independent and still fail to report accurately.

Look the video in the blog. It's the full interview footage, I cannot link the video directly here.

By the way, I respect your opinion but just don't agree

What is your opinion about what is good journalism? is it that it's ok for journalists to not explain anything and to slam people they don't agree with?

The video on the blog you linked to has a length of 3 minutes 58, which is actually shorter than the video posted at the beginning of this thread.

I don't want to insist. I don't think you looked at the video I told you.

The original video have part of speaker in studio, images from protests and so on... The interview cut was around 2'

In the video I pointed you too, and not sure if you watched it, the whole footage (almost 4 minutes) is the interview. So you can listen all questions and answers. That can't be done in the news cut video.

Good journalism is not to make questions that interviewed prepared before and try to dig deep in what we want to know from him.

I can't understand what you demand actually. Should have been him interview a Shinawatra for tie the interview point of view?

I don't think that is the point actually. And please note I am balanced, for me both sides should be rotten in hell.

But if you cheer for the Suthep side so I can understand your reaction, and again, I still respect you but not agree.

The piece wasn't an ANTI protest, but just ask some SMART questions to the leader. IMHO.

[wolf5370]

Is anyone getting tired of and catching on to the Dark Illuminati Giant Coorporate entities controlling this planet for known hundreds of years? Anyone with a logical brain knows 99% of all news media are owned and controlled by large coorporations, no such thing as Free Press. The BBC is among the worst of these and only spins what they want, in order to brainwash/dumb down the masses even further for their own evil agenda. Go away western press and leave Thailand to solve it's own Thainess.

So which "giant corporate" [sIC] entity owns the BBC then?

[JimsKnight]

Scathing report looking down on these idiots with the disdain they deserve.

Good to see Sutheps English skills are on a par with his tactical nous. Absolute moron, whilst Abhisit is equally repulsive at least the guy has brains.

Totally agree. An excellent report there from Channel 4 news - as you say they treat the anti-government demonstrators with the contempt they deserve. Total idiots who cheer on that Dr Seri guy - not because they have a clue what he is talking about but just because he shouts so they think he is saying something forcefully.

I wish Channel 4 would interview some Farangs who support the anti-government protests. They too need to be exposed by the balanced media outlets.

They can interview me anytime, and I'll state for the record that C4 is a biased, left-wing fringe outfit that supports the socialist elements that stab society in the back.

The protestors know that which is why the red-shirts, Thaksin etc are the lowest of the low and people are massively saying enough is enough.

[JimsKnight]

Is anyone getting tired of and catching on to the Dark Illuminati Giant Coorporate entities controlling this planet for known hundreds of years? Anyone with a logical brain knows 99% of all news media are owned and controlled by large coorporations, no such thing as Free Press. The BBC is among the worst of these and only spins what they want, in order to brainwash/dumb down the masses even further for their own evil agenda. Go away western press and leave Thailand to solve it's own Thainess.

So which "giant corporate" [sIC] entity owns the BBC then?

It's supposed to be the tax-payer but they got shafted back in the 60s when it went all fabian-marxist and anti-normal.

[manarak]

I don't want to insist. I don't think you looked at the video I told you.

The original video have part of speaker in studio, images from protests and so on... The interview cut was around 2'

In the video I pointed you too, and not sure if you watched it, the whole footage (almost 4 minutes) is the interview. So you can listen all questions and answers. That can't be done in the news cut video.

Good journalism is not to make questions that interviewed prepared before and try to dig deep in what we want to know from him.

I can't understand what you demand actually. Should have been him interview a Shinawatra for tie the interview point of view?

I don't think that is the point actually. And please note I am balanced, for me both sides should be rotten in hell.

But if you cheer for the Suthep side so I can understand your reaction, and again, I still respect you but not agree.

The piece wasn't an ANTI protest, but just ask some SMART questions to the leader. IMHO.

I watched the whole video - the part where the guy explains that Thaksin went overboard with corruption was cut out of the interview aired on channel 4

In principle I disagree with this part of your post:

Good journalism is not to make questions that interviewed prepared before and try to dig deep in what we want to know from him.

Good journalism is ALSO about helping the interviewees to make their point.

A journalist needs to fully understand the interviewees position and needs to explain that position to the public, including any facts for and against.

Only after the explaining phase is done can the "difficult questions" be asked - because the listeners cannot understand the answers given without understanding the situation first.

The problem is that today's news formats do not allow for long explanations, and journalists aren't worried about misrepresenting a situation, so the result in western media is:

elected government = democratic = good

prostest = anti-democratic = bad

Edited January 15, 2014 by manarak