Thailand Bans YouTube 377
An anonymous reader writes "The new government of Thailand that forced its way into power last year has banned the website YouTube after a 44 second clip was found of someone spray painting on a picture of Thailand's king. When Google refused to remove the 'offending' clip the website was redirected to a different page. This comes days after a Swiss man was jailed 10 years for spray painting on pictures of the king while drunk, and is the same government that earlier this year slammed open source software for being useless and buggy."
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Lots slam OSS for being useless and buggy (Score:3, Insightful)
In my day, we called that kind of stuff flamebait.
You know, like how Apple sucks and everyone who owns a Mac is a faggot.
Respect and Freedom? (Score:2, Insightful)
I've been to Thailand. It's a great place where the king is held in very high esteem. This isn't a tyranny cracking down on opposition, almost all Thais would be very shocked to see a spray-painted picture of the king. Try a stunt like that and you'll be lucky if the police gets you before the enraged mob does.
Now let's wait for the trolls to swarm in and claim that any culture that doesn't share their own values of "First Amendment" and "Freedom of Expression" must be evil and bad. Newsflash: The "total freedom or none at all" attitude only applies to western culture. Asian cultures have more than a thousand years of experience in moderation and non-binary thinking.
Re:Lots slam OSS for being useless and buggy (Score:3, Insightful)
Does this mean that Zonk is going to lose some karma over this?
Seriously, I agree with you. To include that Thailand (or whomever) is not real OSS friendly on an article about YouTube makes about as much sense as including a budget revision for the VA on a gun ban bill.
Opps! Did I say that out loud?
Breaking News.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok so it's censorship and we should all care as we are "free." However, that wasn't really my point. This is hardly news. What do you expect from countries like this. For a place like Thailand banning YouTube is hardly their worst crime. Let's take an example from a week ago that was in the news. Main Jailed for 10 Years for Insulting King [express.co.uk] -- ok and we care about them blocking YouTube? I think there's a tons of worse things they do. Blocking YouTube is probably making them more productive if anything. Not saying it's not wrong or outrageous.. but in comparison to other things that go on there.. it most certainly is.
Re:Respect and Freedom? (Score:4, Insightful)
I realize that female circumcision is much different than banning YouTube, but I don't consider people "trolls" if they disagree with the Thai government's decision to try to control the public arena, just as I wouldn't consider people "trolls" if they criticized the current U.S. administration for practices they found offensive.
Re:Respect and Freedom? (Score:5, Insightful)
Any people that would beat or kill you for insulting someone are not enlightened, cultural superiors. They simple zealous lunatics.
The real test would be their reaction to some Danish cartoons.
Re:Lots slam OSS for being useless and buggy (Score:3, Insightful)
child prostitution: yeah, yeah, so what?
free speech restrictions: yawn...
censorship: zzzzzzz...
Thailand says OSS is "useless and buggy": WHAT!!!! Those sons of bitches!!
It's Like Calling Your Sister a Slut... (Score:4, Insightful)
Should a governmental body have the right to censor material that a large majority of its population finds offensive? Should Germany be allowed to block Nazi hate sites? Should China be allowed to block porn sites? Should any country be able to block material that depicts or encourages actions illegal in that country?
I lived in Thailand for a year and though I have never seen or met the king, I helped teach English at a school he funded and have been on the palace grounds where he lived many times. I can attest that the pride and admiration they have for the king runs deep and this action by the government is the equivalent of punching the guy who called your sister a slut. It may be that the whole episode is forgotten in a few days or it may create a lifelong grudge, but action to defend honor must be taken. And if you don't think defending honor is worth punching someone in the face, you're not going to understand this move by the Thai government.
Re:Now if only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Now if only... (Score:5, Insightful)
According to Thai standards, that dress is considerably worse than that superbowl nipple flash you americans got. And if you read the page you linked to, you'd have seen that the punishment wasn't a hundred million bucks, but reading to blind children for a few days. For me, I consider that a lot more enlightened than a few millions because the chiiiildren will be soooo damaged by seing a picture of something they sucked on a few years ago.
Re:Respect and Freedom? (Score:4, Insightful)
And yes, we hold those things to be self-evident. That doesn't mean others have to as well, does it? Is there a place for diversity in your world of freedom and pursuit of happiness? Or can I only be free and pursue my happiness as long as I follow your code of ethics?
Re:Respect and Freedom? (Score:1, Insightful)
It is illegal here to insult or even to criticize the monarchy. The vast majority of the population loves the King (who is very smart, a good jazz musician and composer, an inventor, and a demonstrably compassionate man) and probably supports the banning of youtube for declining to delete the offending video.
That said, youtube is correct in not deleting it. The video is a stupid mocking insult, like many other stupid mocking insults, and violates no U.S. laws.
Freedom of speech means freedom of offensive speech. If speech doesn't offend anyone it wouldn't need protection, would it?
youtube should be sympathetic to the position of the Thai government and the Thai people, but should stand its ground.
The whole matter of the coup is irrelevant to this topic. In all probability, any Thai government would react the same way. The previous, "democratically elected" Thaksin regime censored lots of Web sites.
--apologies for posting as Anonymous Coward, but really no other way for me to post under the current circumstances.
Re:It's Like Calling Your Sister a Slut... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also just because not everyone in the US blindly respects the same person doesn't mean that each individual doesn't have respect for some figure or another.
Re:Now if only... (Score:4, Insightful)
Whatever you want to call it, "Ass-Backwards" looks the same in any culture.
Re:It's Like Calling Your Sister a Slut... (Score:4, Insightful)
Should a governmental body have the right to censor material that a large majority of its population finds offensive?
No.
Should Germany be allowed to block Nazi hate sites?
No.
Should China be allowed to block porn sites?
No.
Should any country be able to block material that depicts or encourages actions illegal in that country?
No.
If you need any more clarifications of the concept of self-evident freedoms, just shout out.
but action to defend honor must be taken.
Remember that when someone punches *you* in the face.
Maybe a person's "honor" shouldn't be so fragile, or dependent on the opinion of a drunken man with a can of paint.
And if you don't think defending honor is worth punching someone in the face
I guess I don't. I guess I live in the 21st century. But you just keep banging those rocks together, Ugg.
And your sister is a slut. :)
Re:Respect and Freedom? (Score:5, Insightful)
As for smegma. It looks like you havn't looked it up very well. Smegma itself is hygenic. It is the accumulation of smegma by not washing it away at regular intervals that can cause problems. If males aren't learning how to wash their penises correctly, something is seriously wrong with their eduction, and replacing it with a medical procedure is bullshit.
Finally, you claim that uncircumcised penises look goofy? If anything it is circumcised penises that have an unnatural look. Besides, arguing for a medical procedure based on the looks of an organ that is mostly hidden is laughable.
Re:Now if only... (Score:5, Insightful)
Probably.
Then again, the US legal system condones punishments for modifying your own hardware in defiance of the DMCA that exceed what you'd get for assault or auto theft. That same system recently had the potential to lock some guy in prison for 55 years for the crime of 'computer intrusion' -- making it a crime on par with murder.
More telling perhaps, a big chunk of the US is constantly trying to pass legislation to make burning a particular piece of cloth illegal. Is that any less absurd than a law against spray-painting a picture?
I'm not saying I think the Thai law is sensible, but you don't have to go to Thailand to see "ass-backwards".
Re:Now if only... (Score:5, Insightful)
If there's one thing that always drive me up a wall, it's all of this relativism when it comes to matters of culture. At least in America. For some strange reason, it's become taboo to flat out say, "in my eyes, this culture is fucking insane".
I mean, think about it: there are parts of the world where they believe that the grain that America gives them is giving them AIDS. There are parts of the world where people believe that raping a virgin (babies included) can cure AIDS. There are parts of the world where they execute/impose life sentences on drug dealers (of those who they believe to be drug dealers), yet child prostitution runs rampant, in a semi-open manner. The list goes on. I'll be honest, as far as I'm concerned, it's all fucking backwards.
(PS - I'm not saying America is above reproach, either. Not for a second. Hell, the rest of the world has no problem pointing out what they perceive to be our flaws. Why is it that we can never point out theirs?)
Re:Now if only... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because that's the nature of making a judgement. If my neighbour thinks it's fine to have sex with children and I don't I'll judge them by my standards. You don't give up making ethical judgements about someone simply because they have different standards. Similarly it seems entirely reasonable to me for people of one culture to critique the ethics of another. And it seems entirely reasonable for people of a culture to use convenient landmarks in their own history to express those critiques.
Re:Now if only... (Score:1, Insightful)
Indeed. Like the american's outrage over the public display of Janet Jackson's nipple. Talk about "ass-backwards".
Re:Now if only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hypocrisy aside, posts like these are a real source of irritation to me. If the grandparent poster has no right to judge the Thai government on morality, what right does the Thai government have to judge others, even those within its own borders?
Re:Now if only... (Score:1, Insightful)
I think that Jesus guy was right on when he talked about people with logs in their eyes...
Re:A little perspective from an Ex-Pat (Score:1, Insightful)
I couldn't care less about the feelings of Thailand's citizens on the matter.
Insulting the king is a very serious crime.
No, it isn't and saying otherwise still won't make it true. There is no material harm done when a citizen criticizes/ridicules the leadership of their country. Having laws that create a protected class of rulers that are immune to criticism/ridicule invariably leads to abuse.
Their country, their laws.
"Their country, their laws." arguments do not make laws that create a protected class of leadership that is immune from criticism/ridicule any less absurd or unjust.
Certainly you don't believe that American Law should cover the whole world right?
Where did I argue that US laws should cover the whole world? My opinion of this particular law and how it was applied in this particular case wouldn't change regardless of the originating country.
Re:Now if only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Now if only... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Now if only... (Score:1, Insightful)
Unless the prison library stocks a copy of Whorf, Korzybski, et al., your argument is falling on deaf ears.
All cultures are not of equal merit. Some aspects of ours (in the US) suck. Some aspect of the Thai culture also suck.
Would you call ritual clitoridectomy as practiced by African cultures "semantics?" Would you refer a mutilated 5-year-old girl to Whorf, Korzybski, et al.? No? Then STFU, and head on back to the dorms before lights-out.
Re:Now if only... (Score:2, Insightful)
Were you aiming for irony?
Ban probably actually due to anti-junta vids (Score:1, Insightful)