Expert Says New Regulations Coerce Online Platforms To Self-Censor

[webfact]

Expert Says New Regulations Coerce Online Platforms To Self-Censor

By Sasiwan Mokkhasen, Staff Reporter

 

Photo: Elise Amendola / Associated Press

 

BANGKOK — The final regulations written to facilitate the removal of online content under the new Computer Crime Act illustrate the government’s bid to extend its control to alternative media, a computer law expert said last week.

 

Kanathip Thongraweewong, a lecturer at Saint John’s University in Bangkok, said it’s not just the new rules but the process itself that will push the webmasters and independent platforms who’ve not fallen in line with the regime to adopt what he called compulsory self-censorship.

 

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/featured/2017/08/03/expert-says-new-regulations-coerce-online-platform-self-censorship/

 

-- © Copyright Khaosod English 2017-08-03

[trogers]

Any reason words like 'being responsible' are not used in place of self-censor?

[Golgota]

3 minutes ago, trogers said:

Any reason words like 'being responsible' are not used in place of self-censor?

Probably because it is not the same meaning, as the last one is driven by fear of arbitrary sanction and not sense of responsibility

[trogers]

2 minutes ago, Golgota said:

Probably because it is not the same meaning, as the last one is driven by fear of arbitrary sanction and not sense of responsibility

Responsibility does not come from the goodness of our hearts.

 

It is either taught or not taught by our parents. See Red Bull case.

 

In the end, a big stick is needed for quite a few...

Edited August 3, 2017 by trogers

[Golgota]

1 minute ago, trogers said:

Responsibility does not come from the goodness of our hearts.

 

It is either taught or not taught by our parents. See Red Bull case.

You still have people who do not have this...I am quite sure the thing the Junta wants to monitor and the censorship has nothing to do with education or responsibility...for exemple a journalist may think it is his responsibility to let the public now about government corruption and abuses...self censorship will  make this same journalist shut his mouth because he may go to some kind of attitude adjustment...I sincerly hope you see the differences between the two of them 

[yellowboat]

16 hours ago, trogers said:

Any reason words like 'being responsible' are not used in place of self-censor?

One phrase has more to do with silencing debate and scrutiny.  The other is a behavioral response that reflects good breeding and education. 

 

Are you discouraging debate and scrutiny ? 

[trogers]

22 minutes ago, yellowboat said:

One phrase has more to do with silencing debate and scrutiny.  The other is a behavioral response that reflects good breeding and education. 

 

Are you discouraging debate and scrutiny ? 

Using one term without the other, points towards slanting a viewpoint, and is not balance reporting.

[yellowboat]

9 minutes ago, trogers said:

Using one term without the other, points towards slanting a viewpoint, and is not balance reporting.

Censorship, when used to filter out unnecessary things like profanity, brutality and sexual content, is necessary.  In places like Thailand, it is used beyond that point.  Do you feel censorship is needed beyond those three things just mentioned ?

 

Too much censorship does exactly what you just said.

[trogers]

3 minutes ago, yellowboat said:

Censorship, when used to filter out unnecessary things like profanity, brutality and sexual content, is necessary.  In places like Thailand, it is used beyond that point.  Do you feel censorship is needed beyond those three things just mentioned ?

 

Too much censorship does exactly what you just said.

You are talking about a country where people rub tree barks and undergrads prostrating to statues...

 

Use a different measuring ruler.

[YetAnother]

17 hours ago, webfact said:

illustrate the government’s bid to extend its control

the whole  goal of the coup and all the years that followed it

[Golgota]

59 minutes ago, trogers said:

You are talking about a country where people rub tree barks and undergrads prostrating to statues...

 

Use a different measuring ruler.

this is either racist, pretentious or just a lack of answer for the discussion ..

(Catholic spread water on their face thinking it is holy,by the way)

Either you understand censorship is different than responsibility or you just a troll, plain and simple

[jaywalker]

4 minutes ago, Golgota said:

this is either racist, pretentious or just a lack of answer for the discussion ..

(Catholic spread water on their face thinking it is holy,by the way)

Either you understand censorship is different than responsibility or you just a troll, plain and simple

We are not living in the Philippines nor the Vatican.

 

What trogers said is dead on the money.

[worgeordie]

Here we have the Moderators, quick to react to anything dodgy.

regards Worgeordie

[trogers]

16 minutes ago, Golgota said:

this is either racist, pretentious or just a lack of answer for the discussion ..

(Catholic spread water on their face thinking it is holy,by the way)

Either you understand censorship is different than responsibility or you just a troll, plain and simple

Read what was taught 2000 years ago - Matt 7:6

 

Google for it is you are not familiar.

[chrisinth]

19 hours ago, webfact said:

Kanathip Thongraweewong, a lecturer at Saint John’s University in Bangkok, said it’s not just the new rules but the process itself that will push the webmasters and independent platforms who’ve not fallen in line with the regime to adopt what he called compulsory self-censorship.

The problem is that global platforms such as Facebook as depicted in the OP, regardless of them having servers in Thailand or not, cannot guess as to what is deemed as censorship by the Thai government, or individual sections of that government.

 

IMO experts like K. Kanathip are looking at this from the governments viewpoint and not the social media's platforms. In other words his 'expert' view on these platforms adopting compulsory self-censorship through guesswork is rubbish.

[Golgota]

5 minutes ago, trogers said:

Read what was taught 2000 years ago - Matt 7:6

 

Google for it is you are not familiar.

I find your lack of real answer disturbing, and you re moving to OT waters...

Self censorship is different than responsibility, you may not like it, you may praise The Prayuth, but the facts are : self censorship is based on fear, while responsibility is based on conscience...

 

Oh and the bible is not really used by me except as a wedge for my office desk...

Edited August 4, 2017 by Golgota

[trogers]

2 minutes ago, Golgota said:

I find your lack of real answer disturbing, and you re moving to OT waters...

Self censorship is different than responsibility, you may not like it, you may praise The Prayuth, but the facts are : self censorship is based on fear, while responsibility is based on conscience...

 

Oh and the bible is not really used by me except as a wedge for my office desk...

That's why things go wrong...

[Golgota]

11 minutes ago, trogers said:

Read what was taught 2000 years ago - Matt 7:6

 

Google for it is you are not familiar.

 

Timothy 2:12 : I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent.
Exodus 22:18: Do not allow a sorceress to live.

Psalm 137: Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.

Peter 2:18: Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel

we can see religion is cool and funny

Edited August 4, 2017 by Golgota

[rkidlad]

21 minutes ago, Golgota said:

this is either racist, pretentious or just a lack of answer for the discussion ..

(Catholic spread water on their face thinking it is holy,by the way)

Either you understand censorship is different than responsibility or you just a troll, plain and simple

No, it's not racist. It's ridiculing a set of ideas and not a race of people. Same as people who ridicule religious 'ideas' (Islam usually)  - they're not racist. They're ridiculing bad ideas or people who believe in something with zero evidence and that defies the laws of science. 

 

Personal beliefs are fine. You wanna believe that praying to inanimate objects will cure yourself or others of diseases, etc, that's up to you. Once you start preaching this and try to make others believe it, that's where you should rightfully be ridiculed and have your ideas easily and scientifically debunked.  

 

 

 

 

[Golgota]

Just now, rkidlad said:

No, it's not racist. It's ridiculing a set of ideas and not a race of people. Same as people who ridicule religious 'ideas' (Islam usually)  - they're not racist. They're ridiculing bad ideas or people who believe in something with zero evidence and that defies the laws of science. 

 

Personal beliefs are fine. You wanna believe that praying to inanimate objects will cure yourself or others of diseases, etc, that's up to you. Once you start preaching this and try to make others believe it, that's where you should rightfully be ridiculed and have your ideas easily and scientifically debunked.  

 

 

 

 

Weh you use this to justify self censorship and you say it is done because the people are stupid in Thailand and the government do this for "their own good" you are racist or at least someone who thinks he worth much more than the others...especially when this one is used to praise an unelected junta which threatens his citizen

[trogers]

1 minute ago, rkidlad said:

No, it's not racist. It's ridiculing a set of ideas and not a race of people. Same as people who ridicule religious 'ideas' (Islam usually)  - they're not racist. They're ridiculing bad ideas or people who believe in something with zero evidence and that defies the laws of science. 

 

Personal beliefs are fine. You wanna believe that praying to inanimate objects will cure yourself or others of diseases, etc, that's up to you. Once you start preaching this and try to make others believe it, that's where you should rightfully be ridiculed and have your ideas easily and scientifically debunked.  

 

 

 

 

We cannot impose our set of standards on others who have a different set, or else there would be conflict.

[Golgota]

Just now, trogers said:

We cannot impose our set of standards on others who have a different set, or else there would be conflict.

Your original comment which started our discussion was :

"Any reason words like 'being responsible' are not used in place of self-censor?"

which seemed to imply self censorship is the same as being responsible.

From which I answered it was not the same, and you started to speak about religion, people being stupid for praying and we should use "another kind of measurement"

 

So just to get back on topic

[trogers]

17 minutes ago, Golgota said:

Your original comment which started our discussion was :

"Any reason words like 'being responsible' are not used in place of self-censor?"

which seemed to imply self censorship is the same as being responsible.

From which I answered it was not the same, and you started to speak about religion, people being stupid for praying and we should use "another kind of measurement"

 

So just to get back on topic

Being responsible is linked to understanding the target of people you address. Don't use one measuring stick on all. Your standards might be pearls to you but not to others.

Edited August 4, 2017 by trogers

[Golgota]

2 minutes ago, trogers said:

Being responsible is linked to understand the target of people you address. Don't use one measuring stick on all. Your standards might be pearls to you but not to others.

So you re just dodging one more time the answer and deflect with stupid Quote from a book

 

Self censorship is done because of FEAR , moreover self censorship is mostly targetting topics which are free to be talked, especially when those topics imply corruption, or criticize the JUnta for exemple.

Responsibility is done because you know it is wrong in many standards...I guess it is useless to have a discussion with you as the way you answer is useless.

You re just  avoiding any discussion because you know you do not have any real answer to it

[rkidlad]

27 minutes ago, trogers said:

We cannot impose our set of standards on others who have a different set, or else there would be conflict.

These are not standards. Superstitious beliefs are just that - superstitious. Religion and silly ideas cannot survive in a society of ridicule because they have no answers. This is why censorship and forced self-censorship have to be imposed. Don't let facts get in the way fairness and equality kinda idea. 

[trogers]

6 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

These are not standards. Superstitious beliefs are just that - superstitious. Religion and silly ideas cannot survive in a society of ridicule because they have no answers. This is why censorship and forced self-censorship have to be imposed. Don't let facts get in the way fairness and equality kinda idea. 

Your measure of fairness and equality is your measure... that's the point.

[rkidlad]

4 minutes ago, trogers said:

Your measure of fairness and equality is your measure... that's the point.

Yea, fairness and equality for all. Any educated person with morals and empathy would feel the same.

 

Anyone who profits from inequality or hasn't been educated enough to understand it's detrimental to themselves would most likely disagree. 

[Golgota]

this thread is now completly OT and of couse no real answer or discussion from trogers...

[BasalBanality]

1 hour ago, trogers said:

We cannot impose our set of standards on others who have a different set, or else there would be conflict.

Consider me fresh-off-the-boat, what exactly are the standards to measure the Thai's or Thailand as a country by?

 

No one seems to have a defined yardstick.

[trogers]

14 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

The British did and their standard is still the barometer of a country's development today.

Yes, and they also imposed that standard with detection without trial...