Comments

When will Thais learn about the “Streisand effect,” –the backlash that occurs when someone tries to censor information on the Web. When the Streisand effect takes hold, the content doesn’t just quietly disappear. Instead, it infects the online community in a pandemic of free-speech-fueled defiance, gaining far more attention than it would have had the information’s original owners simply kept quiet.

The phenomenon takes its name from Barbra Streisand, who made her own ill-fated attempt at censoringin the Web in 2003. That’s when environmental activist Kenneth Adelman posted aerial photos of Streisand’s Malibu beach house on his Web site as part of an environmental survey, and she responded by suing him for $50 million. Until the lawsuit, few people had spotted Streisand’s house, and fewer more cared. But the lawsuit brought more than a million visitors to Adelman’s Web site, he estimates. Streisand’s case was dismissed, and Adelman’s photo was picked up by the Associated Press and reprinted in newspapers around the world.

The Internet has been mainstream for more than a decade. But what Streisand and others like the the Thai LM Cyberscouts fail to realize, , is that the rules of privacy and information control have changed. “Before, you took the hardest legal stance you could,” says Masnick. “You sent out cease-and-desist letters with a lot of nasty language. But the Internet has turned that around and allowed people to fight back and get a lot more people outraged.”

People don’t like that a large entity can beat up on a little entity, and the power of the Internet has been arrayed to support victims.

Thailand’s Elite vs Joe Gordon.

I’m rooting for Joe.

No matter how they try to spin it, it comes down to An American in American commenting on a book.

Never mind that Thai Translations of the book are availiable on Google, and footnoted and linked in Wilipedia. Joe is in Jail. Languishing.

If Google executives come to Thailand will they be arrested too?
And anyone using wikipedia?

Didn’t Thais already arrest someone else and charge him for being the alleged webmaster of the site? But wait a minute, we can’t know, the trials are held in camera (secret).

Salem 1692, Kampuchea Year Zero, , Germany 1938.

Thailand 2554.

This probably won’t end well…..

John, you accuse everyone that fails to print glowing articles about PTP of propaganda.

The Bangkok Post is actually a *business* organisation whose main activities concern making money rather than pursuing political ideologies.

No political party, PT included, would be brave enough to address this issue for sure. For PT, the best they can do is perhaps to slow down new cases, especially those filed by govt officials associated in some way or another with the current administration (they’ll certainly think twice or three times before accusing anyone on the LM ground if the ruling power changes hand).

Unfortunately Chris Baker is not hired by Thaksin this time but a guy named Songsak from the VoiceTV has done the job:

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/240485/putting-her-best-face-forward

To be fair, no one can beat Abhisit in public speaking so it will take years for Yingluck to even give a passable interview. But as the lady vendor at a Bangkok suburb told Abhisit during his campaign round: “You are only good at talking, but has done nothing at all in the last 2 years.”

@Kate,
the reason why columnists write about them are purely part of Thaksin’s marketing plan, trust me.

I would love to ‘trust’ your plain assertion, if you would provide some evidence to back it up :p

Paul, to be honest, have very little interest in politics.

I would have to disagree with the comment below, Yingluck’s reason for entering Politics is definitely not the same as Aungsan Suu Kyi. She is seen as Thaksin’s puppet who’s destined to acquire Thailand’s political power for the sole benefit of her brother and nothing else. She is far from the next Aungsan Suu Kyi, please don’t degrade Aungsan this way. And oh, Political degree has nothing to do with one’s principle or political standing point. If you watch Yingluck’s interviews like I do, you will understand. She doesn’t even know what she was talking about when being asked about Thailand political issues.

“Nathawut mentioned Aungsan Suu Kyi, Corazon Aquino, and Benazir Bhutto and compared them with Yingluck in his speech at Lumbini Park last Saturday. The three ladies from three different countries were not prepared for political role but when situation required, they could stand up to the occasion. With proper practice and guidance from men around her, I believe Yingluck can do the same. Don’t forget Yingluck studied political science in the US.”

Considering the food shortages and the price increases worldwide it seems strange to make comments about agriculture not being important anymore .
Some of the more intelligent comments address the real issues , transport , water , roads , land quality , and lack of access to markets .
Food is a very valuable commodity and a profitable income for many families and unless people no longer need to eat , I cant see this changing .
What is needed is some real commonsense and direction in quality farming , accessible markets , decent roads , good water supply and some form of control over the greedy people who control and manipulate fuel and fertiliser prices .
Some real wholesale markets with controlled trading to make sure the farmer gets a fair price , not just a token gesture that allows the wealthy to manipulate and rip off the real workers .

@Nuomi
“Like CT, I do not wish to risk ending up in jail for two weeks in BKK accidentally saying the wrong thing”

Your choice of word to use ‘wrong’ is interesting. This raises an interesting observation as to what does ‘wrong’ mean to most Thais, when this word is used in the subject of the Monarchy. Does ‘wrong’ mean ‘false’? Surachai Sae-Daan was imprisoned because he said in public that someone attended the PAD funeral, therefore the Reds no longer respect that person. Da Torpedo was jailed because she said in public that someone ‘endorsed’ the coup, and that for him to choose to retain his own family’s prestigious status over the wishes of the majority, is the most selfish act.

So what does ‘wrong’ to you mean? Does it mean ‘untrue’? Or does it simply ‘not completely fawning to the Monarchy’? It seems that most brainwashed Thais think it means the latter.

PS. I am glad you want to know me, oh well, we can be friends online at this time-being 🙂

There is an anti-Puea Thai propaganda piece in the Bangkok Post this morning which delineates the damage to be done to the democratic process by the de-coupling of the party-list ballot from the real, constituent ballot :

Pheu Thai heads off rival

Pheu Thai wants to stop voters leaving it for Bhumjaithai. But given the close timing _ less than a month is left until the July 3 election _ the party may have left it too late to make much impact.

Bhumjaithai is doing well, especially in the Northeast, with its strategy of asking people to vote for both parties.

Voters can give the party-list vote to Pheu Thai while reserving the constituency vote for Bhumjaithai, its candidates suggest.

Many voters seem to be ready to vote that way.

The Pheu Thai Party is likely to win party-list votes while Bhumjaithai will do well in the constituency system.

For Pheu Thai, however, a split vote could spell defeat.

The strategy might be unfolding as the Bangkok Post says, but I have doubts about its efficacy. I doubt the Bhumjaithai Party ‘is doing well’ anywhere. In fact I see the Bangkok Post as a propagandist organization, counter-indicative of political “truth”.