“It is self-evident that the Bangkok foreign media-corps,… etc etc”
You are perfectly entitled to believe all these things (however ill informed)…. This still does not excuse you of lambasting them for not doing something you actually admit in the same post, and later on, it was never in their power to do…..
It is either dishonest or simply incompetent or both. You then further compound the dishonesty, incompetence or both with further smears and accusations….. This is distasteful, but is also symptomatic of the methods you consistently employ.
I have deep admiration for the coverage of politics in Thailand by some of the correspondents for whom you have such unwarranted contempt. Nick Nostitz whose work is published both here on New Mandala and in a series of books, has produced unrivaled and in depth on the ground coverage of both the Red and the Yellow movements. Work produced at some personal risk to himself and with a fine eye for facts and the respecting of them. Nirmal Gosh of the Straits Times produces thoughtful work with deep insight and deep humanity. Andrew Marshall formerly a freelancer for Time magazine and now a staffer for Reuters produced some of the most resourceful and perceptive coverage on the ground of the 2010 crisis….. I could go on…. There are others. Many correspondents have also been targeted with both physical threats and had Lese Majeste accusations filed against them by PAD political extremists and their henchmen….
And now you, a self appointed blogger, not only falsely accuse them of not doing something you know full well it was never in their power to do…. But you do not even have the good grace to admit fault and apologise for the unwarrented smear….. Shame on you.
Now that the Candlelight Protests are going to end peacefully every one will come out saying how tolerant and democratic New Burma is and Thein Sein is Great and all that in all sites.
But Hlaing Thar Yar is heading for tragedy and no one would talk about that for awhile., just like Kachin does not happen. The mammoth “Pipes” is true elephant in the room no one ever notices.
Laiza is likely to fall in two weeks. The reaction will depends entirely on how much video and pictures come out. Like those tragic Sarajevo Market bombs, only pictures and videos work in this modern imaginative enlightened world.
I have to thank tocharian for the link and also agree with him, having listened to what ASSK had to say about the candlelight protests. Rather long on rhetoric and short on substance.
She expanded quite a bit on the need for electric lighting (was this really necessary?), laid the blame rightly on failure of the govt but exhorted the people to be patient as this had been a longstanding problem (the sainted leader to the more sainted nation), and explained this kind of mundane issue had to be a low priority compared to democracy. Did she not accept ‘democracy’ as defined by the regime already? Fat chance amending, nay rewriting, the constitution in this parliament until 2015, and only if free and fair elections happen then. Hope springs eternal. Completely and utterly reliant on this govt’s good faith in keeping its promise. All her sodden eggs in one basket.
Professor Benjamin Reilly, at the Crawford School of Public Policy, writes toThe Australian, in relation to Senator Xenaphon’s experience, that:
For far too long, Australian governments and public institutions have turned a blind eye to the infringement of democratic principles in quasi democracies such as Malaysia, preferring to focus on trade and diplomatic engagement. The result has been a soft-pedalling on human rights issues.
He goes on to suggest that:
Now that an Australian politician has had a taste of the treatment routinely handed out to opposition movements in Malaysia, perhaps we will stand up for our values a bit more.
Looking forward to more Australian politicians and civil servants standing up for Australian values.
Even though you’ve refused to answer it in simple terms, you’ve made ir clear that you do believe the PT government should be held to account for the treatment of LM prisoners more than AI/HRW.
That’s rational.
Is it right that you failed to mention this in your article because you wanted to launch a stinging, unbalanced and disproportional attack on AI/HRW because that better serves your agenda.
It is self-evident that the Bangkok foreign media-corps, in the main, refuse to point out the restrictions they work under when reporting. And that many of them are not engaged enough to push at the limits of those restrictions and that they often place their own self-interest above that of doing their job and getting closer to the truth. Most are way too content with the comforts and status that Bangkok offers them. Those that do push the boundaries are soon expelled or hate-campaigned. I would also suggest that many have deliberately misrepresented the facts and have actively supported, despite bogus claims of impartiality, anti-democratic forces in Thailand. That’s my view, at least.
There’s that much new in that though or anything particular to Thailand.
But, Tom, there really is no private money though, is there? It is like McDonald subsidising for promotion of “healthy eating”.
My main point is by all means get UNESCO to fund all the metropolis to their heart’s content, the fundamental issue remains this thoroughly misguided worldwide craze about urbanization.
Unfortunately the young, vocal, connected Burmese seem to share Thant Myint-U line of thinking in that shiny buildings and planned urbanization and for this instance saving the colonial relics are a good thing. Only if there is also parallel ample opportunity for the rural populace to feed themselves in comfort and their family and send their youngs to schools and give donation which are modest but vital for the Buddhists and practitioners of other religions alike.
There is currently very little covetousness and admiration of the fake theme parks and high buildings Thant Myint-U found so appealing in Yunan among the people of Burma.
With the New Burma, with land loot and cheap labour factories and conspired, contrived situation, which Norway and KNU are starting to put in practice, where average man is trapped for subsistence wage work with occasional breaks for strikes, the urbanization would indeed become inevitable along with usual urban ills of social indifference, crime, drug use and prostitution which are not part of the scene in current rural Burma at all.
For the good of Burma, the aim should be to put in real effort to make sure all boats are raised with the tide rather than current scene of the people sinking further with the rising tide.
In short, urbanization itself is undesirable and in a country like Burma, where the rural populace have grown rice and plants to feed the whole country including their oppressors for centuries and are the true reservoir of religion and culture, it would illustrate ” Gone with the wind”.
Unfortunately you have not persuaded me to think of this fancy project anything different than Marie Antoinette’s cake.
It should be pretty clear who should be held to account.
It seems to be a better idea to amend LM after the succession when it will be less controversial in the eyes of the public. Especially as doing it now is risking to spark a new cycle of violence that would likely get worse than what we saw in 2010.
“It’s a well-established tactic for journalists to operate in the fashion I did when I visited the prisoners.”
It certainly is and as I said, I think that those who are non accredited are in a good position to do what you did. I have no problem with it. I just wish you had written a better article.
What is odd is that you lambast the foreign correspondents who are accredited as journalists and are not in the same position as you are, as an accredited tourist, for not ‘taking the 250 baht ride’ to the relevant jail. Yet in the same post you describe a situation where it would actually be impossible for them to the job you are lambasting them for not doing… Don’t you think that is inconsistent and grossly unfair? Or did you just not think it through properly before you wrote it?…. It is after all a fairly obvious and glaring contradiction.
“If all we consumed were the views of “accredited journalists” many of whom, as you and Nick rightly pointed out are unable to always get close to sensitive stuff, then we’d only get half the story.”
Well it was you who introduced the subject with this line. “Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”……
No one, accredited or otherwise, had criticised your actions in gaining access to these people so brutally incarcerated….. So why did you initiate this unsolicited attack on the international press for something that is, at present, simply a fact of life?
I’ve asked you to point to the place where I claim that I “hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day”
You haven’t been able to do so.
I have responded with evidence showing you that I clearly don’t think that is the case. If you choose to ignore that what else can I say?
For certain if I’d researched the article after the death of Ah Kong I would’ve asked more searching questions about prison conditions. What I can say is that I did speak to Ah Kong on two occasions before his death and at both times he told me “conditions have improved.” That seems like a terrible irony now but it was what he said.
Also, for me, distributing the story that Kerry McCarthy MP raised the issue of Ah Kong’s death in the UK parliament was something I felt was far better than just blathering on about it on a blog somewhere.
Andrew, sorry to go off topic, but there’s something that may be of interest to you.
You say you are a PhD candidate. You do realise don’t you that the final stage of the process involves a “defence” of your thesis. That means you will have to go into a room with three (I think) leading academic experts in your area of research who will spend an intense five hours with you when they go through your work and try to pull it to pieces. That means they will ask a lot of questions quite possibly similar to the one’s which are posed here and you will need to answer them in a satisfactory manner. Offering links, answering questions that haven’t been asked, or saying you have answered a question which you have actually chosen to sidestep than answer directly, are tactics which will unlikely win on the day.
Perhaps you could use this forum to brush up on your skills a little.
Andrew, I’m not upset at all. Thanks for the concern, though.
“1) I have answered all your questions politely and without rancour. Happy to continue to do so.”
No you haven’t. But it’s good to know you are happy to do so. As such could you please begin by answering the simple, polite question which I have already posed a number of times but that you have not answered.
Do you seriously hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day?
Referring to other links and other articles is irrelevant, because my question relates directly to the scope, frame and tone of the above piece.
If it’s a simple matter that you chose not to mention it because it would have dampened the partial perspective on the matter that you wanted to present, then that’s all fine and dandy. But why not just say so?
You write “Given the amount of scrutiny which you apply to any other article written on Thailand’s political situation, one would imagine that you would have enough integrity to hold yourself up to the same level of scrutiny. Surely you’re not operating according to “double standards” are you?”
Two points first of all.
1) I have answered all your questions politely and without rancour. Happy to continue to do so.
2) I can’t really answer questions about things I didn’t say, never meant and have never stated just because you think I did. Sorry.
I’m just a mere blogger Greg. I’m not that important. My work isn’t published in the mainstream press, I don’t seek public office nor do I claim impartiality or to represent any powerful international NGO like HRW. All I’ve done here is present some different voices. You seem very very upset about that.
If all we consumed were the views of “accredited journalists” many of whom, as you and Nick rightly pointed out are unable to always get close to sensitive stuff, then we’d only get half the story.
I had some role in getting these parliamentary questions raised – these questions & the answers have already been used to legitimise international criticism of the PT govt to a degree.
I’m pretty happy with my efforts in that matter and I’d hope you would be too.
You’ve given the best argument yet for why I work the way I do.
Because I am based in the UK and not reliant on a work visa I can jump into the prison and interview the prisoners on an ad hoc basis.
Surely you’d support me operating in that way as I can get access that you can’t?
As for international journalism – the BBC Panorama team came from the UK to film an hour long documentary on Thailand and April/May 2010 last year. Do you have any idea or notion why they decided to do so and who was involved in persuading them?
“Furthermore, as a “journalist” (blogger is a better description), I am not even supposed to be in there interviewing anyone and, at one point, I was rumbled by the prison guards and, with the aid of a member of the prisoners’ support network, had to smuggle my notes out.”
You then state
“However, there are plenty of foreign “journalists” based full-time in Bangkok who could make a much better job of recording the views of the prisoners in full. Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”
Well you may have a partial solution to your own implied question in your own post….. I have no idea which professional media workers might have succeeded in interviewing LM accused or convicted prisoners and I would applaud any responsible media worker who tried. Maybe some have tried and failed for the reason you outline above. Have you asked? Also bare in mind that, given the restrictions you have described, professional and accredited foreign correspondents here might have greater problems gaining access than an anonymous visitor on a tourist visa. Presumably you have to present your passport to the authorities as ID? …. This is a very good reason for those who are not accredited as journalists in Thailand to take advantage of their non-professional status as tourists to gain access.
What obstacles exactly would the authorities put in the way of either accredited journalists or human right workers visiting these prisoners? What exactly are the rules and how would you suggest the media attempt to get around them without being either refused, arrested or deported?
Gosh Andrew. You’re worse than a snake in a bag, squirming away there.
I can’t pull the line from the article where you wrote: “It is now certain AI/HRW are more responsible for Ah Kong’s death than the govt.”
Why? Because you conveniently failed to mention the fact that PTP were in power when Ah Kong was handed down what many see was the heaviest and most unfair LM sentence in history, and they were in power when he died in atrocious conditions in prison.
Rather than mention this fact at all, or mention that the PTP government which administers the prison in which this terminally ill man was allowed to die without proper medical attention, you instead launched into an attack AI and HRW.
You wrote: “How these conditions and the failure of the international human rights NGOs to monitor these conditions effectively impacted on the health of the recently deceased Ah Kong has yet to be ascertained.”
You then responded: “Amnesty and HRW are responsible for their actions and have been part of creating context where mistreatment of LM prisoners became possible.”
Still no mention of the government.
So the question remains, why the hall pass for PTP? Do you seriously hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day?
Also of interest is how you have made a clear shift from writing in support of the red shirts, to writing in support of PTP. Why is this?
Given the amount of scrutiny which you apply to any other article written on Thailand’s political situation, one would imagine that you would have enough integrity to hold yourself up to the same level of scrutiny. Surely you’re not operating according to “double standards” are you?
“Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”
This is another rather polemic line of attack which is also not exactly true. As we are living in Thailand, prison visits to covertly interview lese majeste prisoners can turn quite problematic, and interfere with the renewal of our work visas.
There are much better and for all involved safer ways to talk with and interview people that are accused under article 112 than by prison visits under which conditions anyhow a proper interview is hardly possible. When, for example, defendants appear at court, it is possible to easily and without any problems to speak with them at breaks, before or after the session.
We can even photograph the defendants legally and with permission of the court during the transfer from the bus to the holding cells at court.
Why should we endanger our visas and work permits, and maybe even pose problems to the defendants by breaking rules when we don’t even have to?
You also have to understand the nature of international journalism. International journalism, local journalism and activism are completely different matters. In international journalism editors of international media will only accept stories in which there is for them an international angle visible. One may not like this aspect of the business of journalism, but that is how it is. Persuade or lobby editors sitting in Europe and in the US to pay more attention to lese majeste in Thailand, and you will see foreign correspondents doing more work on this issue automatically. But as long as editors decide this is not a major issue for their readers, foreign correspondents cannot do anything about it. Not everybody is a fool like me, working mostly for free or for book projects which also are not exactly profitable considering the time spent on the subject matter.
Therefore you see, for example, that the Chiranuch case, or the Joe Gordon case, gets much international attention, while others don’t. I have, for example sold my image of Chiranuch behind bars many times (and several times it was stolen as well), while my images of other accused under the 112 laws collect dust. Local mass media only very carefully reports on lese majeste cases. But international media cannot replace local media.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Human rights and lese majeste
#58 Andrew Spooner
“It is self-evident that the Bangkok foreign media-corps,… etc etc”
You are perfectly entitled to believe all these things (however ill informed)…. This still does not excuse you of lambasting them for not doing something you actually admit in the same post, and later on, it was never in their power to do…..
It is either dishonest or simply incompetent or both. You then further compound the dishonesty, incompetence or both with further smears and accusations….. This is distasteful, but is also symptomatic of the methods you consistently employ.
I have deep admiration for the coverage of politics in Thailand by some of the correspondents for whom you have such unwarranted contempt. Nick Nostitz whose work is published both here on New Mandala and in a series of books, has produced unrivaled and in depth on the ground coverage of both the Red and the Yellow movements. Work produced at some personal risk to himself and with a fine eye for facts and the respecting of them. Nirmal Gosh of the Straits Times produces thoughtful work with deep insight and deep humanity. Andrew Marshall formerly a freelancer for Time magazine and now a staffer for Reuters produced some of the most resourceful and perceptive coverage on the ground of the 2010 crisis….. I could go on…. There are others. Many correspondents have also been targeted with both physical threats and had Lese Majeste accusations filed against them by PAD political extremists and their henchmen….
And now you, a self appointed blogger, not only falsely accuse them of not doing something you know full well it was never in their power to do…. But you do not even have the good grace to admit fault and apologise for the unwarrented smear….. Shame on you.
Thant Myint-U on Yangon
U Moe Aung,
Now that the Candlelight Protests are going to end peacefully every one will come out saying how tolerant and democratic New Burma is and Thein Sein is Great and all that in all sites.
But Hlaing Thar Yar is heading for tragedy and no one would talk about that for awhile., just like Kachin does not happen. The mammoth “Pipes” is true elephant in the room no one ever notices.
Laiza is likely to fall in two weeks. The reaction will depends entirely on how much video and pictures come out. Like those tragic Sarajevo Market bombs, only pictures and videos work in this modern imaginative enlightened world.
Counting on the National League for Democracy
I have to thank tocharian for the link and also agree with him, having listened to what ASSK had to say about the candlelight protests. Rather long on rhetoric and short on substance.
She expanded quite a bit on the need for electric lighting (was this really necessary?), laid the blame rightly on failure of the govt but exhorted the people to be patient as this had been a longstanding problem (the sainted leader to the more sainted nation), and explained this kind of mundane issue had to be a low priority compared to democracy. Did she not accept ‘democracy’ as defined by the regime already? Fat chance amending, nay rewriting, the constitution in this parliament until 2015, and only if free and fair elections happen then. Hope springs eternal. Completely and utterly reliant on this govt’s good faith in keeping its promise. All her sodden eggs in one basket.
Malaysia’s struggle for reform is on the streets, and in the news
Professor Benjamin Reilly, at the Crawford School of Public Policy, writes to The Australian, in relation to Senator Xenaphon’s experience, that:
He goes on to suggest that:
Looking forward to more Australian politicians and civil servants standing up for Australian values.
Human rights and lese majeste
Ok Andrew.
Even though you’ve refused to answer it in simple terms, you’ve made ir clear that you do believe the PT government should be held to account for the treatment of LM prisoners more than AI/HRW.
That’s rational.
Is it right that you failed to mention this in your article because you wanted to launch a stinging, unbalanced and disproportional attack on AI/HRW because that better serves your agenda.
Human rights and lese majeste
Orinoco
It is self-evident that the Bangkok foreign media-corps, in the main, refuse to point out the restrictions they work under when reporting. And that many of them are not engaged enough to push at the limits of those restrictions and that they often place their own self-interest above that of doing their job and getting closer to the truth. Most are way too content with the comforts and status that Bangkok offers them. Those that do push the boundaries are soon expelled or hate-campaigned. I would also suggest that many have deliberately misrepresented the facts and have actively supported, despite bogus claims of impartiality, anti-democratic forces in Thailand. That’s my view, at least.
There’s that much new in that though or anything particular to Thailand.
Thant Myint-U on Yangon
Tom,
Thanks. And also Daw Kyi May Kaung.
But, Tom, there really is no private money though, is there? It is like McDonald subsidising for promotion of “healthy eating”.
My main point is by all means get UNESCO to fund all the metropolis to their heart’s content, the fundamental issue remains this thoroughly misguided worldwide craze about urbanization.
Unfortunately the young, vocal, connected Burmese seem to share Thant Myint-U line of thinking in that shiny buildings and planned urbanization and for this instance saving the colonial relics are a good thing. Only if there is also parallel ample opportunity for the rural populace to feed themselves in comfort and their family and send their youngs to schools and give donation which are modest but vital for the Buddhists and practitioners of other religions alike.
There is currently very little covetousness and admiration of the fake theme parks and high buildings Thant Myint-U found so appealing in Yunan among the people of Burma.
With the New Burma, with land loot and cheap labour factories and conspired, contrived situation, which Norway and KNU are starting to put in practice, where average man is trapped for subsistence wage work with occasional breaks for strikes, the urbanization would indeed become inevitable along with usual urban ills of social indifference, crime, drug use and prostitution which are not part of the scene in current rural Burma at all.
For the good of Burma, the aim should be to put in real effort to make sure all boats are raised with the tide rather than current scene of the people sinking further with the rising tide.
In short, urbanization itself is undesirable and in a country like Burma, where the rural populace have grown rice and plants to feed the whole country including their oppressors for centuries and are the true reservoir of religion and culture, it would illustrate ” Gone with the wind”.
Unfortunately you have not persuaded me to think of this fancy project anything different than Marie Antoinette’s cake.
Human rights and lese majeste
The army is threatening a military coup if the LM law is amended. The Democrats are filing a LM complaint against the DSI police chief for not charging Jatuporn with LM .
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/294732/dems-petition-against-dsi-chiefs
It should be pretty clear who should be held to account.
It seems to be a better idea to amend LM after the succession when it will be less controversial in the eyes of the public. Especially as doing it now is risking to spark a new cycle of violence that would likely get worse than what we saw in 2010.
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
Thanks for your advice on how to secure a PhD.
Here, however, is probably a better read on the topic of “vivas”
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=406493
Human rights and lese majeste
#50 Andrew Spooner
“It’s a well-established tactic for journalists to operate in the fashion I did when I visited the prisoners.”
It certainly is and as I said, I think that those who are non accredited are in a good position to do what you did. I have no problem with it. I just wish you had written a better article.
What is odd is that you lambast the foreign correspondents who are accredited as journalists and are not in the same position as you are, as an accredited tourist, for not ‘taking the 250 baht ride’ to the relevant jail. Yet in the same post you describe a situation where it would actually be impossible for them to the job you are lambasting them for not doing… Don’t you think that is inconsistent and grossly unfair? Or did you just not think it through properly before you wrote it?…. It is after all a fairly obvious and glaring contradiction.
“If all we consumed were the views of “accredited journalists” many of whom, as you and Nick rightly pointed out are unable to always get close to sensitive stuff, then we’d only get half the story.”
Well it was you who introduced the subject with this line. “Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”……
No one, accredited or otherwise, had criticised your actions in gaining access to these people so brutally incarcerated….. So why did you initiate this unsolicited attack on the international press for something that is, at present, simply a fact of life?
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
I’ve asked you to point to the place where I claim that I “hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day”
You haven’t been able to do so.
I have responded with evidence showing you that I clearly don’t think that is the case. If you choose to ignore that what else can I say?
For certain if I’d researched the article after the death of Ah Kong I would’ve asked more searching questions about prison conditions. What I can say is that I did speak to Ah Kong on two occasions before his death and at both times he told me “conditions have improved.” That seems like a terrible irony now but it was what he said.
Also, for me, distributing the story that Kerry McCarthy MP raised the issue of Ah Kong’s death in the UK parliament was something I felt was far better than just blathering on about it on a blog somewhere.
Human rights and lese majeste
Andrew, sorry to go off topic, but there’s something that may be of interest to you.
You say you are a PhD candidate. You do realise don’t you that the final stage of the process involves a “defence” of your thesis. That means you will have to go into a room with three (I think) leading academic experts in your area of research who will spend an intense five hours with you when they go through your work and try to pull it to pieces. That means they will ask a lot of questions quite possibly similar to the one’s which are posed here and you will need to answer them in a satisfactory manner. Offering links, answering questions that haven’t been asked, or saying you have answered a question which you have actually chosen to sidestep than answer directly, are tactics which will unlikely win on the day.
Perhaps you could use this forum to brush up on your skills a little.
Human rights and lese majeste
Andrew, I’m not upset at all. Thanks for the concern, though.
“1) I have answered all your questions politely and without rancour. Happy to continue to do so.”
No you haven’t. But it’s good to know you are happy to do so. As such could you please begin by answering the simple, polite question which I have already posed a number of times but that you have not answered.
Do you seriously hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day?
Referring to other links and other articles is irrelevant, because my question relates directly to the scope, frame and tone of the above piece.
If it’s a simple matter that you chose not to mention it because it would have dampened the partial perspective on the matter that you wanted to present, then that’s all fine and dandy. But why not just say so?
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
You write “Given the amount of scrutiny which you apply to any other article written on Thailand’s political situation, one would imagine that you would have enough integrity to hold yourself up to the same level of scrutiny. Surely you’re not operating according to “double standards” are you?”
Two points first of all.
1) I have answered all your questions politely and without rancour. Happy to continue to do so.
2) I can’t really answer questions about things I didn’t say, never meant and have never stated just because you think I did. Sorry.
I’m just a mere blogger Greg. I’m not that important. My work isn’t published in the mainstream press, I don’t seek public office nor do I claim impartiality or to represent any powerful international NGO like HRW. All I’ve done here is present some different voices. You seem very very upset about that.
Human rights and lese majeste
Orinoco
It’s a well-established tactic for journalists to operate in the fashion I did when I visited the prisoners.
Here’s a story of the UK’s award-winning Channel 4 news team recently being arrested and deported from Bahrain for not being properly accredited.
http://www.channel4.com/news/channel-4-news-team-arrested-in-bahrain
If all we consumed were the views of “accredited journalists” many of whom, as you and Nick rightly pointed out are unable to always get close to sensitive stuff, then we’d only get half the story.
Human rights and lese majeste
Greg
Please refer to this – http://asiancorrespondent.com/82623/exclusive-questions-about-lese-majeste-and-ah-kong-asked-in-uk-parliament/
I had some role in getting these parliamentary questions raised – these questions & the answers have already been used to legitimise international criticism of the PT govt to a degree.
I’m pretty happy with my efforts in that matter and I’d hope you would be too.
Human rights and lese majeste
Nick
Thanks.
You’ve given the best argument yet for why I work the way I do.
Because I am based in the UK and not reliant on a work visa I can jump into the prison and interview the prisoners on an ad hoc basis.
Surely you’d support me operating in that way as I can get access that you can’t?
As for international journalism – the BBC Panorama team came from the UK to film an hour long documentary on Thailand and April/May 2010 last year. Do you have any idea or notion why they decided to do so and who was involved in persuading them?
Human rights and lese majeste
#44 Andrew Spooner
“Furthermore, as a “journalist” (blogger is a better description), I am not even supposed to be in there interviewing anyone and, at one point, I was rumbled by the prison guards and, with the aid of a member of the prisoners’ support network, had to smuggle my notes out.”
You then state
“However, there are plenty of foreign “journalists” based full-time in Bangkok who could make a much better job of recording the views of the prisoners in full. Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”
Well you may have a partial solution to your own implied question in your own post….. I have no idea which professional media workers might have succeeded in interviewing LM accused or convicted prisoners and I would applaud any responsible media worker who tried. Maybe some have tried and failed for the reason you outline above. Have you asked? Also bare in mind that, given the restrictions you have described, professional and accredited foreign correspondents here might have greater problems gaining access than an anonymous visitor on a tourist visa. Presumably you have to present your passport to the authorities as ID? …. This is a very good reason for those who are not accredited as journalists in Thailand to take advantage of their non-professional status as tourists to gain access.
What obstacles exactly would the authorities put in the way of either accredited journalists or human right workers visiting these prisoners? What exactly are the rules and how would you suggest the media attempt to get around them without being either refused, arrested or deported?
Human rights and lese majeste
Gosh Andrew. You’re worse than a snake in a bag, squirming away there.
I can’t pull the line from the article where you wrote: “It is now certain AI/HRW are more responsible for Ah Kong’s death than the govt.”
Why? Because you conveniently failed to mention the fact that PTP were in power when Ah Kong was handed down what many see was the heaviest and most unfair LM sentence in history, and they were in power when he died in atrocious conditions in prison.
Rather than mention this fact at all, or mention that the PTP government which administers the prison in which this terminally ill man was allowed to die without proper medical attention, you instead launched into an attack AI and HRW.
You wrote: “How these conditions and the failure of the international human rights NGOs to monitor these conditions effectively impacted on the health of the recently deceased Ah Kong has yet to be ascertained.”
You then responded: “Amnesty and HRW are responsible for their actions and have been part of creating context where mistreatment of LM prisoners became possible.”
Still no mention of the government.
So the question remains, why the hall pass for PTP? Do you seriously hold AI and HRW more to account on LM in general, and Ah Kong’s death in particular, than the government of the day?
Also of interest is how you have made a clear shift from writing in support of the red shirts, to writing in support of PTP. Why is this?
Given the amount of scrutiny which you apply to any other article written on Thailand’s political situation, one would imagine that you would have enough integrity to hold yourself up to the same level of scrutiny. Surely you’re not operating according to “double standards” are you?
Human rights and lese majeste
“Andrew Spooner”
“Unfortunately, despite being only a 250baht taxi ride from the centre of Bangkok, very very few of the foreign media corps make it to the prison and speak to the prisoners.”
This is another rather polemic line of attack which is also not exactly true. As we are living in Thailand, prison visits to covertly interview lese majeste prisoners can turn quite problematic, and interfere with the renewal of our work visas.
There are much better and for all involved safer ways to talk with and interview people that are accused under article 112 than by prison visits under which conditions anyhow a proper interview is hardly possible. When, for example, defendants appear at court, it is possible to easily and without any problems to speak with them at breaks, before or after the session.
We can even photograph the defendants legally and with permission of the court during the transfer from the bus to the holding cells at court.
Why should we endanger our visas and work permits, and maybe even pose problems to the defendants by breaking rules when we don’t even have to?
You also have to understand the nature of international journalism. International journalism, local journalism and activism are completely different matters. In international journalism editors of international media will only accept stories in which there is for them an international angle visible. One may not like this aspect of the business of journalism, but that is how it is. Persuade or lobby editors sitting in Europe and in the US to pay more attention to lese majeste in Thailand, and you will see foreign correspondents doing more work on this issue automatically. But as long as editors decide this is not a major issue for their readers, foreign correspondents cannot do anything about it. Not everybody is a fool like me, working mostly for free or for book projects which also are not exactly profitable considering the time spent on the subject matter.
Therefore you see, for example, that the Chiranuch case, or the Joe Gordon case, gets much international attention, while others don’t. I have, for example sold my image of Chiranuch behind bars many times (and several times it was stolen as well), while my images of other accused under the 112 laws collect dust. Local mass media only very carefully reports on lese majeste cases. But international media cannot replace local media.