In Thailand, come for the fun. Snap a selfie, though, and go to jail

[cockatoowho]

I don't think anyone will go to jail if they post a picture with a beer bottle. That is just ridiculous. As for scummy "celebrities" who were caught advertising beer it serves them right. I'm sure though that this thread will run for dozens of pages since it is about the precious alcoholic drink.

Correct the writers of this article take it out of context. This is about celebrities that are paid to promote beer. There are even celebrities that have already admitted it.

Normal people with a few face-book followers wont have a problem at all.

Tell that to the people at the Kacha Kacha restaurant at Asiatique in Bangkok. The executive and the shop were fined Bt460,000 for the violation of the Alcohol Control Act of 2014 from July 30 to March 6 2015 or 220 days. The shop and the owner were fined Bt220,000 each plus an extra fine of Bt10,000 each, for showing beer bottles in menus.

[DrTuner]

Normal people with a few face-book followers wont have a problem at all.

So, once you've posted a beer bottle photo in fbook, be careful not to get too many friends or it's off to attitude adjustment for you.

[LivinLOS]

I don't think anyone will go to jail if they post a picture with a beer bottle. That is just ridiculous. As for scummy "celebrities" who were caught advertising beer it serves them right. I'm sure though that this thread will run for dozens of pages since it is about the precious alcoholic drink.

Correct the writers of this article take it out of context. This is about celebrities that are paid to promote beer. There are even celebrities that have already admitted it.

Normal people with a few face-book followers wont have a problem at all.

Tell that to the people at the Kacha Kacha restaurant at Asiatique in Bangkok. The executive and the shop were fined Bt460,000 for the violation of the Alcohol Control Act of 2014 from July 30 to March 6 2015 or 220 days. The shop and the owner were fined Bt220,000 each plus an extra fine of Bt10,000 each, for showing beer bottles in menus.

Unfortunately direct precise quotes I made were deleted because they were printed in the BP..

But the architect of the law, and the person directly in charge of the acohol control division has publicly states that this applies to all private citizens and not only 'celebrity' which of course cannot be defined..

When that kind of direct line comes from the horses mouth, the very man who primarily wrote the law, and wishes to enforce it.. How can it be 'out of context'.

[Suradit69]

The connection between "Thai celebrities" pushing some brands of booze and "Jet-setting Instagrammers" seems tenuous at best.

[Time Traveller]

Good luck trying to extradite someone from a normal country over breaking that law while in thailand on holiday.

Thailand, again the laughing stock of the world..

[Time Traveller]

What if you don't take a selfie but someone takes a picture of you and posts it on FB? What then?

That's conspiring, which means both of you go to prison and get your sentences doubled.

[Truth4All]

Seriously going downhill fast. So utterly disappointing and sad.

But-- It IS Reality! Watch how fast the Western tourists don't come to Thailand anymore-- Don't believe they want you here, anyway! The feeling is mutual, for me.

[Gonsalviz]

And THIS is how Thai officials spend their time. Is it any wonder that the government of this country is in the crapper?!?!?!?! Thank God there are no important issues that need to be addressed!

Gov'ts in western countries do the same sort of stuff. It is all a smoke screen to keep the minions busy while they screw them.

[SilverBeast]

I don't think anyone will go to jail if they post a picture with a beer bottle. That is just ridiculous. As for scummy "celebrities" who were caught advertising beer it serves them right. I'm sure though that this thread will run for dozens of pages since it is about the precious alcoholic drink.

Serves them right? How do you figure?

Displaying the logo is no more "encouraging others to drink" than showing the logo-less bottle.

The law, or the spirit of the law, which is good in theory, is designed to prevent commercial advertising of alcohol.

What Chang (allegedly) did was try to skirt the law via social media, and they deserve to be censured.

A selfie with a bottle of beer, logo displayed or not, does not contravene the the spirit of the law because it is not commercial advertising.

Storm in a teacup and pompous "I'm important because I can interpret the law" nonsense.

There's also the fact that most selfies on social media are not promulgated to the public, but to a select group of friends, albeit that group might run in to the thousands.

That law is good? Why worry about preventing commercial advertising?

[ClutchClark]

What an intentionally misrepresented title and OP.

Pure sensationalism.

What this issue is actually about is advertising and brand placement by well-known celebrity figures.

It is not about a tourist taking a selfie.

[ClutchClark]

Actors cannot advertise cigarette smoking in the US by law...they are not allowed to skirt the law by posting a selfie.

BTW, the celebrities in this article have been exposed to have received compensation by the brewers...that is paid advertising.

Period.

[simon43]

So howabout this page in my hotel drinks menu?

(I have blanked out the beer names, in case I am breaking the law by posting the 'raw' menu page).

My menu clearly shows the name of the beers, because many of my guests do not speak a word of English - the menu is designed so that they can simply point at the illustration and order the drink.

Does my menu break the law? Should I charge more for the drink?

[srchino]

Beer Chang would be brilliant if they bought ads on the original article page, as well as in the Bangkok Post pages with this government decree.

It would probably be a non-issue to the govt. if it'd been Singha instead, knowing how powerful that family is in Thailand.

Regardless, Beer Chang tastes like piss and gives a damn bad hangover.

Beer Leo FTW!

[theguyfromanotherforum]

I don't think anyone will go to jail if they post a picture with a beer bottle. That is just ridiculous. As for scummy "celebrities" who were caught advertising beer it serves them right. I'm sure though that this thread will run for dozens of pages since it is about the precious alcoholic drink.

Serves them right? How do you figure?

Displaying the logo is no more "encouraging others to drink" than showing the logo-less bottle.

The law, or the spirit of the law, which is good in theory, is designed to prevent commercial advertising of alcohol.

What Chang (allegedly) did was try to skirt the law via social media, and they deserve to be censured.

A selfie with a bottle of beer, logo displayed or not, does not contravene the the spirit of the law because it is not commercial advertising.

Storm in a teacup and pompous "I'm important because I can interpret the law" nonsense.

There's also the fact that most selfies on social media are not promulgated to the public, but to a select group of friends, albeit that group might run in to the thousands.

That law is good? Why worry about preventing commercial advertising?

Serves them right because they thought they'd get away with it because of their status.

Serves them right because they were all lying about it.

Serves them right because they thought people are stupid.

[TomJoad]

No beer brands in photos? In the West we even brand ourselves these days. It's all part of globalization.

[SilverBeast]

I don't think anyone will go to jail if they post a picture with a beer bottle. That is just ridiculous. As for scummy "celebrities" who were caught advertising beer it serves them right. I'm sure though that this thread will run for dozens of pages since it is about the precious alcoholic drink.

Serves them right? How do you figure?

Displaying the logo is no more "encouraging others to drink" than showing the logo-less bottle.

The law, or the spirit of the law, which is good in theory, is designed to prevent commercial advertising of alcohol.

What Chang (allegedly) did was try to skirt the law via social media, and they deserve to be censured.

A selfie with a bottle of beer, logo displayed or not, does not contravene the the spirit of the law because it is not commercial advertising.

Storm in a teacup and pompous "I'm important because I can interpret the law" nonsense.

There's also the fact that most selfies on social media are not promulgated to the public, but to a select group of friends, albeit that group might run in to the thousands.

That law is good? Why worry about preventing commercial advertising?

Serves them right because they thought they'd get away with it because of their status.

Serves them right because they were all lying about it.

Serves them right because they thought people are stupid.

No it doesn't serve them right. You are just jealous of their wealth and status and angry that you aren't able to achieve that level of status.

"Serves them right for making some money posting some selfies with beer". You sound like such a petulant child.

[nithisa78]

the nitwits have spoken.

[Vandadavid]

Who cares