BBC says it will respect Thai laws while maintaining its integrity

[TKDfella]

2 hours ago, Classic Ray said:

I find the best approach is to use a variety of media, compare and contrast, and the reality may be somewhere in there.

 

Journalists are always a target for any authoritarian regime, as they expose uncomfortable truths. It happened in South America, South Africa and many other countries.

 

Well done to the BBC for sticking to its principles whilst recognizing the situation under which their journalists operate.

And I think there is a implied /'hidden' comment too. That it has more respect for it's reporters than for the present regime.

[Bluespunk]

8 minutes ago, kowpot said:

Oh my! I think it is snowing in Thailand. 

Oh dear, quoting fox weather reports now.

[dageurreotype]

I believe saying Fox is the best news source says rather more about it's competitors. 

[RDavis]

Well done to the BBC for telling Thailand that they will not curtail to the wishes of a 'so called' unelected barbarian government and not report the truth and pertinent facts about this medieval country in the 21st century

[FritsSikkink]

6 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

As they should be.

why, they never had it

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, FritsSikkink said:

why, they never had it

Going to have to disagree there.

[wakeupplease]

6 hours ago, true word said:

bbc is biased, it is not even close to aljazeera

may i suggest you look up the word biassed and explore its meaning?

[KKr]

7 hours ago, kowpot said:

Except Fox must be doing something right. More Americans are watching it instead of the others.

fox has series, supposedly for entertainment, and less journalistic footage.

[Seligne2]

Sound to me like BBC are a bunch of pussies. Not the same organisation that stood up to Fascists  in the 1940s.

[uchibenkei]

Cnn and msnbc are both garbage networks too, just on the other side of the coin.  Journalism is dead.  It's all social engineering, lies, spin and infotainment now.  

Edited March 30, 2017 by uchibenkei

[joecoolfrog]

9 hours ago, true word said:

bbc is biased, it is not even close to aljazeera

That highly subjective belief is based more on your particular bias than on any anecdotal evidence.

[joecoolfrog]

7 hours ago, jesimps said:

One thing I like about Fox, the anarcos and liberals hate it. Don't they?

Bright people take on board various media slants in order to be fully informed. The more narrow minded only wish to have their bias confirmed , they are content to be ignorant of the wider picture.

[pbeieio]

11 hours ago, true word said:

bbc is biased, it is not even close to aljazeera

If you say that then you obviously don't watch or listen to the BBC, know its structure or history!

If you are foolish enough to think that it is a mouthpiece for the British Gov't then you are wrong.

[balo]

12 hours ago, kowpot said:

Fox News Channel Crowned 2016’s Most Watched Basic Cable Network

They are all being brain washed. No wonder Trump won the election .   And Trump only watches Fox News so he can tweet fake news stories.  I feel sorry for normal  US citizens that have to live with this.   

 

[thhMan]

It still amazes me that people whine over things on TV...

Friendly Tip: Your remote has a button that you can use to change channels.. If no remote, consider changing the channel manually

 

Some laws are meant to be contested as they where derived in an era where suppression was the norm and has carried to this day and age

Some countries had laws to govern the handling of slaves... today, those laws have been changed as society has gotten smarter/ethical or just realized the errors of its ways

 

Pandering to a screaming child having a tantrum is not always the best way to handle things as that child will grow up and will have a precedence over how to handle things in its maturity.... Much like a dictator of some unknown country.. etc.

 

 

[Wilsonandson]

Thai news and international news in some respects don't mix well together. Although access to the internet is for everyone to see what ever they wish to view when it come to reporting news Thailand has rules. Follow the rules and no problem. As you can see in the first posts by the Thaivisa news team they have clearly stated the rules here in Thailand. Enough said.

[daveAustin]

17 hours ago, Asiantravel said:

Up to you if you want to watch propaganda channels but don't impose your low standards on everyone else!

Agreed! I noticed there were a lot of dumb posts on here.

 

17 hours ago, true word said:

bbc is biased, it is not even close to aljazeera

You are confusing bias with PCness. Easy mistake to make though for the non-thinker; sort of like liberal lefty loons crying racist at folks that don't agree with a certain religion. BBC had a pair of stones at one time, but bias it most certainly isn't... being paid for by the people, it wouldn't dare.

Edited March 31, 2017 by daveAustin

[the guest]

Thailand is a very little country ( and not particularly important) in the realm of global matters. The BBC should not pander to one country alone, nor should it respect rights which are not aligned to international standards.

[Srikcir]

21 hours ago, webfact said:

“It’s important to note that the article in question was written and published at the BBC head office in London,” Unsworth said. “No BBC Thai staff based in Thailand played any part in writing or publishing the article. Nor did our Bangkok-based news-gathering staff.”

That won't prevent the junta from holding Thai employees hostage to extract concessions from BBC regarding their reporting on Thailand topics. As representatives of BBC, Thai employees can be charged with defaming the Thai nation vis a vis articles critical of the junta, military, nation, etc. if they reprint, republish or electronically  post "foreign" BBC articles. The Junta could also simply close the whole BBC Thai news outlet.

 

 

[JAG]

Thailand is a very little country ( and not particularly important) in the realm of global matters. The BBC should not pander to one country alone, nor should it respect rights which are not aligned to international standards.

In many ways true, but, Thailand is a major tourist destination ( for British people and others), it has a significant expatriate community ( British and others), and rather likes to present itself as important on the world stage. For those reasons I suggest that it is not unreasonable for The BBC, as a worldwide broadcaster, to deal with Thailand and operate here.

[Thechook]

So does this mean they have to water down news to suit thai consumption and will they be allowed to present the real story to the rest of the world.  I think when I see a BBC story on Thailand in Thailand I will just see a doctored rubbish story full of lies to appease the junta.

[AGareth2]

1 hour ago, Thechook said:

So does this mean they have to water down news to suit thai consumption and will they be allowed to present the real story to the rest of the world.  I think when I see a BBC story on Thailand in Thailand I will just see a doctored rubbish story full of lies to appease the junta.

maybe not lies

but prob half truths

[JAG]

That won't prevent the junta from holding Thai employees hostage to extract concessions from BBC regarding their reporting on Thailand topics. As representatives of BBC, Thai employees can be charged with defaming the Thai nation vis a vis articles critical of the junta, military, nation, etc. if they reprint, republish or electronically  post "foreign" BBC articles. The Junta could also simply close the whole BBC Thai news outlet.
 
 

All the BBC need to do, with every report, is what they did if I recall when reporting from Apartheid South Africa and Mugabe's Zimbabwe; that is for the studio presenter to state before each package is broadcast that the BBC is circumscribed by the rules imposed by the Thai Government.

That simple statement speaks for itself.

[Srikcir]

40 minutes ago, JAG said:

circumscribed by the rules imposed by the Thai Government.

BBC article circumscribed by Thai government rules:

 

[tomta]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

All the BBC need to do, with every report, is what they did if I recall when reporting from Apartheid South Africa and Mugabe's Zimbabwe; that is for the studio presenter to state before each package is broadcast that the BBC is circumscribed by the rules imposed by the Thai Government.

That simple statement speaks for itself.

Something that Andrew MacGregor Marshall has always advocated. Lately, the Sydney Morning Herald has adopted this policy.

 

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by tomta
missing word

[tomta]

On 3/30/2017 at 3:57 PM, jesimps said:

One thing I like about Fox, the anarcos and liberals hate it. Don't they?

I think it's an odd and fairly stupid idea to base your views on the idea that people that  you don't like are obviously wrong. It would be more interesting to say why they are are wrong, rather than to say they don't watch Fox.

 

[tomta]

On 3/30/2017 at 3:09 PM, darksidedog said:

This does go to the heart of the matter. What can you say and where can you say it? The BBC published the story in London, not here.

It found its way here through Facebook. By the Juntas standards, no one can say anything bad about Thailand, anywhere, but that's just not feasible.

How could anyone anywhere in the world know what was happening in the world, if every country did the same thing?

Freedom of speech is about being able to say what you can show to be true. And the truth as they say often hurts.

I see where you're coming from, dog, but Freedom of Speech is also about Freedom to tell Lies (or truths that you believe). Orwell's 1984. Freedom of Speech is the freedom to say 2+2=4 and also the freedom to say 2+2=5.

[tomta]

But if you have to say 2+2 =4, you do not have freedom of speech. If you want to say 2+2 = 5, you can say it. But there is no obligation for a refereed scientific journal to publish it.

[wakeupplease]

The BBC need to stop wasting UK taxpayers money (every home in the UK pays £145.00 and businesses to) pull out and move on, they also need to protect Brits from propaganda and corruption.

 

BBC Texit please

[johng]

Orwell's 1984.

Banned in ********