Thailand Youtube blocking controversy gets uglier - new video online
Youtube is not likely to be back any time soon. The situation has become a lot uglier thanks to user ‘thaifreespeech’ who has posted a 42-second video entitled ‘Bh–ibol Adul—-j 2: K–g of the ap-s!’ I watched it just now on a proxy server and even I was a little shocked. The video depicts HMtK as a monkey with the following words across the screen:
This video would give up to 15 years prison in Thailand, because their leaders are evil and hate free speech.
A Swiss man, Oliver Rudolf Jufer (57) was sentenced to 10 years in prison for spraying graffiti over images of the Thailand’s revered K–g.
F-ck Thailand leaders and the -pe K–g
How do you react to something like that? The video ends with a pair of women’s feet placed in front of the image of HMtK (the ultimate sign of disrespect). There is also a link to a freedom of speech article on Wikipedia. The message is clear, but the way of expressing it is quite unjust. This is not the way to go about protesting censorship, but the problem has escalated as a result of Youtube being blocked in the first place. Blocking Youtube is futile. I suspect that it will never be unblocked now because, as I said, the nature of the internet means that a video such as this will always be there, on one website or another, uploaded by one user or another.
So where do we go from here?
One response to the Youtube video by a user was a follows:
I truly understand your anger and frustration but to divert it to somebody else like this is not the right thing to do. Please respond reasonably and not make the matter worsen. By the way, I am a Thai citizen and a Buddhist too.
Conversely, this next response gives some indication of another problem: people outside of Thailand are not fully aware of Thai culture, and therefore this situation is only going to make Thailand look bad in foreign eyes. Not everybody appreciates the value of HMtK in Thai society. This clash of ideologies raises a new debate about the monarchy, but I’ll leave that off this blog for now.
You are all such ignorant, fearful, mean bullies that have no conception of freedom of speech or human rights. I really pity you all. I find it truly shocking that you are making such a big deal about someone making a video criticizing your leader. Leaders owe us good leadership. They need to be called to task for bad choices.
People without knowledge of Thailand cannot be blamed for taking this line of thought. As I said, it’s ugly, very ugly.
Addendum: This is sparking enormous debate across the internet. Take a look at Slashdot for starters. What this is boiling down to is about more than just censorship, it’s about the lesse majeste laws that Thailand has in place. What we are seeing is Western people making judgments about Thailand based on their own surroundings; this will only serve to fuel the debate.
Techno’ tags: MICT, Internet censorship, Bangkok, Thailand, Youtube blocked
April 6th, 2007 at 10:05 am
[...] The Lost Boy has details on the latest block on YouTube in Thailand. Preetam Rai [...]
April 6th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Exactly… How can you promote free speech if you use them to insult other people? Clearly, the clip is not a criticism; it is an insult. I don’t understand why some people at YouTube think this is a legitimate criticism to the King.
I don’t quite agree with your last bit, though.
For people who have a little knowledge of Thailand, they should shut up! Seriously, if they don’t know what they’re talking about, they need to stop making such a ludicrous accusation.
April 6th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
But it’s because they don’t know what they’re talking about that they make the accusation. I don’t know a way around this.
April 6th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Thai government blocking youtube? I knew it was a matter of time. But this video is a whole different ball of wax I have to pick.
I said this yesterday but here I go again.
Does anyone remember that American kid who was caned in Singapore? Yeah. Dumb fuck broke the law and get punished accordingly. US erupted into this whole “how barbaric!!” frenzy.
Here we are with the Swiss guy. He broke Thai laws, the country he is in at the moment. He SHOULD go to jail. Once again, people spring into action to protect someone breaking the law unlike their own.
Because we’re not like you that doesn’t make either of us bad.
April 6th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Maybe… forgiveness is the best solution to end this quickly… otherwise it would be one hell of a long debate. Thais gotta forgive those ppl who r not aware of Thai culture and our social value. Others gotta forgive the gov’t for blocking youtube and respond to the video this way… oh T_T I want youtube back!
April 6th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Freedom of speech is not founded on the notion that we can only speak freely when our message is kind or just; we can complain about what was said and how it was said, but, no matter what, people should STILL have the right to say it. Bush is often depicted as a donkey and worse (and for good reason), but you don’t see us banning youtube or any other media. I know, in Thailand, the King is God, but maybe we should question this blind reverence and not people’s right to criticize and even insult their leaders if they so choose. This is not hate speech or defamation of character; it’s verbally and visually insulting someone who is not liked for whatever reason; it’s not “nice,” it’s even disgusting and immature, but it shouldn’t be against the law.
April 7th, 2007 at 7:02 am
Oakly wrote: He broke Thai laws, the country he is in at the moment. He SHOULD go to jail.
Come on, when Thais break the laws in other countries the Thai government always gets involved. When a Thai worker killed a taxi driver in Singapore about ten years ago there was great outrage that he got death. There were protests and Singapore was made out to be the bad guy. That guy broke Singapore laws but Thais wanted him sent home. Works both ways you know.
Ten years for graffiti, come on. Why not just kick him out of the country and save the money?
April 7th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
But laws are laws, if the the law of the country says that you can be imprisoned for upto 15 years, then that law’s got to be followed. This man had a fair trial, the courts only did their job which was to enforce the laws written down.
If the courts just kicked him out of the country, they could be accused of practising double standard.
Whether the man gets a parole is another question.
April 7th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
“This man had a fair trial, the courts only did their job which was to enforce the laws written down.”
Depends how you define fair trial. His lawyer said he get what he deserved, hardly the position a defence lawyer should take. The trial proceedings where held “in camera” so no one knows what happened during the trial. There have been 22 Lese Majeste cases over the last 10 years and every single person was found guilty.
I could go on about the general rules of the criminal justice system in Thailand, from no discovery etc, to point out the lack of rights for the accused in the Thai judicial system, but I think people get the point.
“Whether the man gets a parole is another question. ”
Foreigners can’t get parole. They either get a pardon, are deported, or in non-serious crimes can stay once their sentence is complete/fine is paid.
Oakley: “Here we are with the Swiss guy. He broke Thai laws, the country he is in at the moment. He SHOULD go to jail. Once again, people spring into action to protect someone breaking the law unlike their own.”
Criminal defamation is part of the Thai Criminal Code and calling someone a “dumb fuck” is prima facie defamatory. Do you think you should go to jail because you broke the law? If not, why the difference between you and the Swiss guy? As your defamed the American guy on the internet and your message has been “published” in Thailand, Thai law might very well apply to you.
April 7th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
@Leo. Only because something is law, doesn’t mean it’s correct. Sentencing someone to 10 years into prison for using color in the wrong context, is in my opinion wrong. Dont forget it’s an easy discussion at the moment, since almost all Thai’s love their King and critizism is out of question. But in future, there might be a time coming where people have different opinions about their leader and then the entire discussion become a bit more complex.
April 8th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Certainly this is a result of most westerners, again not all…and I do not dare generalize, failure to appreciate and understand, Thai/Asian culture. The Thai King, is not like any other elected world leader, nor any European Monarch, with almost every Thai supporting their King, these videos not only insult the King but all his people. The problem in thei Thai(Asian)-Western war on Free Speech boils down on the western ethnocentric behavior to impose their morals and beliefs to a people outside of their own. This lack of openmindedness of individuals is what is trully barbaric.
April 9th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Pundit:
Since you brought that up and I’m sure you know more about the laws that I do, and I’m not being tongue and cheeky about this, seriously I’m just curious to know how the laws work in that case.
If I’m in Thailand, breaking Thai laws, and they’re going to trial me for it, sure. But as of this case, I’m not in Thailand. Nor is the guy I wrote about.
If we’re going by the rule that what you are saying is published on the internet in Thailand, then the guy who made THE video should be tracked down and trialed for lese majeste, yes?
For something to be published on the internet, it’s published everywhere, not just in Thailand. Does that mean that everyone who wrote anything on the internet from anywhere in the world should be trialed in whatever country’s their opinions are questionable?
This all comes back to the whole free speech thing again, isn’t it?
Really, I want to know how this whole thing works.
April 10th, 2007 at 11:28 am
BP, let’s be honest, the lawyer for the swiss guy was literally and metaphorically in a no win situation wasn’t he:-)
I’ve given Matt (that’s the poster, right?) some stick but this article is spot on. As Preya said, freedom of speech includes freedom to say things we don’t like. As I said in my own piece, Thailand desperately wants the modern image but the antiquated regime simply don’t have the confidence to allow their people the freedom to choose their institutions. I wonder why?
April 10th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Oakley:
“If I’m in Thailand, breaking Thai laws, and they’re going to trial me for it, sure. But as of this case, I’m not in Thailand. Nor is the guy I wrote about.”
You don’t always have to be in a country for those country’s laws to apply to you. If the court has jurisdiction, the law can apply to you. A court’s jurisdiction can extend beyond its borders this is called extraterritorial jurisdiction. The Thai Criminal Code has extra-territorial jurisdiction as specified in sections 7 and sections 8. From a quick reading, Criminal Defamation is not one such provision. I didn’t know where you were at the time of making the statement so if you weren’t in Thailand at the time of making the statement you are probably ok.
Now, for civil defamation in some countries, you don’t necessarily have to be in the same country for defamation law to apply - see this article although in that case the person defamed was in the country in question.
“If we’re going by the rule that what you are saying is published on the internet in Thailand, then the guy who made THE video should be tracked down and trialed for lese majeste, yes?”
Do we actually know the location of the person who made the video? He could be in Thailand using a proxy or a VPN.
From a quick reading of sections 7 and 8, the lese majeste provisions (s112) - as they are within the national security chapter of the Criminal Code - also apply to those outside of Thailand.
I am not saying these should be tried, I am just saying from my quick reading they can be tried. Then, again it might be difficult to prove exactly who made the video and then bringing the person to trial.
“For something to be published on the internet, it’s published everywhere, not just in Thailand. Does that mean that everyone who wrote anything on the internet from anywhere in the world should be trialed in whatever country’s their opinions are questionable?”
Depends on the question of jurisdiction. In most developed countries, defamation is a civil matter not a criminal matter so it would be a civil trial so unless the person you are suing have deep pockets and you have the possibility of recovering the money it might not be worth it.
April 11th, 2007 at 9:05 am
I know it’s hard to explain. But, I would like our Ministers to try to explain the reason why should the clips be removed.
Our King is sacred. I don’t know how to explain in English. But, it’s not just the laws or any customs or that kind of stuff.
It’s because he’s been so kind so great to all the thai. It would takes ages to tell how he has helped and is helping us. He goes everywhere that thais need help. He’s so selfless. That’s why he gains royalty from thai people. Try asking the thais why they love him do not put this issue in your own perspective.
April 11th, 2007 at 9:20 am
LINK
these guys explain this stuff better than I did.
April 15th, 2007 at 8:40 pm
Life is so short and unpredictable, we all face death one day. There is so little time to Love anyways. So will this all come to an end when His Majesty leaves for Heaven?
April 26th, 2007 at 1:25 am
“…The problem in thei Thai(Asian)-Western war on Free Speech boils down on the western ethnocentric behavior to impose their morals and beliefs to a people outside of their own.”
So I guess the entire Western World will have to bow down to the Thais who are trying to impose their morals and beliefs on the rest of the world. Get a grip. No one cares and they shouldn’t care either. They’re so filled with fear that everything is going to come undone in their culture. They need to let loose the apron strings of their king, because they feel they can’t do anything without him. Well, guess what. Everybody else in the world can and so can they. Insult or criticism? Doesn’t matter. If they really know the truth, they should be content with that alone, regardless of what anybody says, does, or thinks.
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:11 am
[...] It’s disappointing that YouTube doesn’t take this opportunity to really engage its “community,” in dialogue about the two main issues: the cultural insensitivity of the images depicted in the slideshow and one’s right to free speech. But the controversy has fueled interesting exchanges at Slashdot http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/05/1239213) and at Global Voices http://whatismatt.com/youtube-blocking-sparks-new-video/ among other places, betraying what most of us already know — we are culturally biased and sometimes fairly ignorant in the West. I’m not condoning YouTube’s decision to take down the clip, in fact, I personally am not in agreement with the decision, irrespective of the financial consequences to YouTube (we all know that they’re making enough money that they can afford “losing” one country). The real question is: does YouTube really want to “police” for cultural insensitivity? Frankly, will we when we launch The Hub (http://www.witness.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=14&Itemid=243/)? One person’s culturally reprehensible remark is another person’s right to speech. [...]