FACT - Freedom Against Censorship Thailand

The Princess and the Facebook Girl
By Lawrence Pintak
Arab Media & Society: May 2008

http://www.arabmediasociety.com/topics/index.php?t_article=199

The relationship between media and state in the Middle East and North Africa is no fairy tale. Not a single Arab country has a press classified as “free.” For every step forward, there is at least one step back. For every official committed to loosening the reins, there is a lawyer wielding a lawsuit or a police thug with a blood-spattered baton. The rack may be history, but electric probes are today’s torture implement of choice…The contrast between Princess Rym Ali, sister-in-law of Jordan’s king, and the plight of 27-year old Esraa Abdelfattah, Egypt’s so-called “Facebook Girl,” succinctly sums up the contradictions inherent in government-media relations in the Arab world…Princess Rym, a former CNN correspondent, is on a quest to build the region’s first Arabic language graduate school of journalism. Facebook Girl, meanwhile, found herself being hustled off by Egyptian state security after creating a group on the popular social networking site that attracted 75,000 members and served as the spark for the country’s recent anti-Mubarak strikes.
…The Egyptian regime’s contempt for – and fear of – the media can be seen in the recent seizure of satellite uplink equipment used by Al-Jazeera’s Cairo bureau and prosecution of the equipment’s owner; in what news execs tell us is pressure on Egypt-based satellite channels like Dream, Orbit, O-TV and El-Mehwar to sanitize their coverage of the recent riots in the delta town of Mahalla.

Oct 6 massacre redux in the making by Manager-PAD
Somsak Jeamtheerasakul, Department of History, Faculty of Arts, Thammasat University
Prachatai: May 7, 2008

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=626

On Tuesday morning, Oct 5, 1976, an ultra-rightist group called the ‘Housewives Club’ held a demonstration at the Royal Plaza to protest the government in light of the crisis caused by Field Marshal Thanom’s return.  The protest went on until almost the afternoon when someone raised the issue of a photograph of a re-enactment that had been staged by Thammasat students at noon of the previous day, Oct 4.  This portrayed the hanging of two electricians in Nakhon Pathom who had been protesting against Thanom.  A photograph of the scene was published on the front page of the Bangkok Post the following day.  The protesters claimed that the face of one of the students who took the role of a hanged electrician resembled that of the Crown Prince, and accused the students of lèse majesté. Read the rest of this entry »

[FACT comments: Strange that the audio files have been deleted from the independent download sites.]

Chotisak no show at forum due to threats from Manager Radio
Prachatai: May 5, 2008

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=623

On May 2, a public forum was held at Thammasat University to address the controversial issue of the refusal of Chotisak Onsoong and his girlfriend to stand for the royal anthem. The panelists included social critic Sulak Sivarak, historian Suthachai Yimprasert, and reporter Pravit Rojanaphruk, with Thammasat lecturer Kasem Penpinan as the moderator.

The organizers, including the Santi Pracha Dharma Institute and Fah Diew Kan (Same Sky) magazine, started the forum with an audio clip recorded from a radio programme ‘Metro Life’ which belongs to the Manager Group, the driving force of the anti-Thaksin, royalist People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD). The radio programme was broadcast on the night of April 30 at FM 97.75, or Manager Radio, during which the hosts incited listeners to come to the forum to attack Chotisak and disrupt the event.

(Note: since the evening of May 2, the audio files of the programme for April 29 and 30 have been removed from www.managerradio.com, but can be downloaded here (29) and here (30).)

The organizers therefore informed participants that Chotisak would not join the panel at the forum for safety reasons. Read the rest of this entry »

เสวนาวิชาการ : ‘สิทธิมนุษยชน กับความคิดเห็นที่แตกต่าง’
Prachatai: May 3, 2008

http://www.prachatai.com/05web/th/home/12059

วันที่ 2 พ.ค.51 ที่คณะเศรษฐศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์ (มธ.) ท่าพระจันทร์ มีการเสวนาวิชาการเรื่อง ‘สิทธิมนุษยชน กับความคิดเห็นที่แตกต่าง’ โดย สถาบันสันติประชาธรรม ซึ่งเป็นเวทีสืบเนื่องจากกรณีที่นายโชติศักดิ์ อ่อนสูง และนางสาวชุติมา เพ็ญภาค ถูกแจ้งข้อหาหมิ่นพระบรมเดชานุภาพ เนื่องจากไม่ยืนเคารพเพลงสรรเสริญพระบารมีในโรงภาพยนตร์เมื่อเร็วๆ นี้ โดยมีผู้อภปิรายร่วมแลกเปลี่ยนความคิดเห็นได้แก่ สุลักษณ์ ศิวรักษ์, สุธาชัย ยิ้มประเสริฐ อาจารย์จากจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, ประวิตร โรจนพฤกษ์ ผู้สื่อข่าวหนังสือพิมพ์เดอะ เนชั่น และ เกษม เพ็ญภินันท์ จากคณะศิลปศาสตร์ มธ.เป็นผู้ดำเนินรายการ ซึ่ง ‘ประชาไท’ ได้ถอดความและเรียบเรียงเนื้อหาส่วนที่ทั้ง 3 คนนำเสนอบนเวที

ทั้งนี้ ในช่วงเริ่มต้นของงานเสวนา ทางคณะผู้จัดได้เปิดเสียงรายการ “Metro Life” จัดรายการโดยต่อพงศ์ เศวตามร์ และ อำนาจ เกิดเทพ ออกอากาศทางคลื่นยามเฝ้าแผ่นดิน FM 97.75 เวลา 21.30 น. เมื่อวันที่ 30 เม.ย.ที่ผ่านมาเป็นเวลาประมาณ 10 นาที ในส่วนของเนื้อหาที่เป็นไปในทางยั่วยุให้ผู้คนเกิดความเกลียดชังและเข้ามาก่อความรุนแรงในงานเสวนาดังกล่าวตลอดจนทำร้ายนายโชติศักดิ์

หลังจากนั้นทางคณะผู้จัดฯ จึงได้แจ้งต่อผู้เข้าร่วมงานว่าเนื่องจากเกิดกระแสยั่วยุดังกล่าวทำให้เห็นว่าเพื่อความปลอดภัย ไม่ควรให้นายโชติศักดิ์ อ่อนสูง เข้าร่วมงานในครั้งนี้ ซึ่งตามกำหนดเดิมนั้นเขาเป็นผู้ร่วมเสวนาคนหนึ่ง

“ทางคณะผู้จัดงานเห็นว่าไม่ควรให้คุณโชติศักดิ์มาร่วมงานด้วยเกรงเรื่องสวัสดิภาพของคุณโชติศักดิ์และผู้ร่วมงาน รวมทั้งเกรงว่าอาจจะเกิดความรุนแรงและถูกขยายผลนำไปเป็นเครื่องมือทางการเมืองอื่นๆ สุดท้าย เราขอยืนยันว่า ในสังคมประชาธิปไตยจะต้องมีการเคารพความคิดเห็นที่แตกต่างกัน ไม่ว่าความคิดเห็นนั้นจะแตกต่างสักเพียงใดก็ตาม ตราบเท่าที่ความเห็นนั้นไม่นำมาสู่การสร้างความรุนแรงให้เกิดขึ้นในสังคม และกรณีทีเกิดขึ้นกับคุณโชติศักดิ์นั้นแสดงให้เห็นอย่างชัดเจนว่า สังคมไทยอาจจะยังห่างไกลจากสิ่งที่พึงปรารถนา และคุณโชติศักดิ์ อ่อนสูง ก็เป็นเหยื่อของสังคมที่ไม่เคารพความเห็นที่แตกต่าง” คณะผู้จัดชี้แจง Read the rest of this entry »

[FACT comments: I think there is little actual support to abolish the Thai monarchy. Abolition of monarchy is a painful transition, as most recently in Nepal, and rarely serves the public interest. The issue is about abolishing the lèse majesté laws or, at the very least, amending them with clear guidelines as to their application. That one Thai citizen "can't stand" his fellow Thais' opinions and thinks that gives him the right to charge public Web discussion fora is ludicrous and the perfect example of what is wrong with the laws.]

Same Sky Books and Prachatai websites charged for allowing comments about Chotisak’s ‘not standing’
Prachatai: April 29, 2008

http://www.prachatai.com/english/news.php?id=620

Yet another Thai man has sued Chotisak Onsoong for not standing during the Royal Anthem in a cinema, as well as two websites for allowing discussion about this in their forums…On April 28 a Khon Kaen resident filed charges under Article 116 (2) of the Thai Criminal Code with police against Chotisak, for offending the monarchy and inciting unrest, and Fah Diew Kan (www.sameskybooks.org) and Prachatai websites for publishing threads of discussions by readers who supported Chotisak’s act…“There are many comments supporting Chotisak’s claim that people who stand for the Royal Anthem are those who like the Sakdina system [Thai feudalism].  One post says that she is married to a foreigner, and will tell her husband not to stand either, because she has long disliked the monarchy.  And one person rudely parodies the lyrics of the Royal Anthem.  As a Thai with great respect toward the monarchy, I can’t stand this,’ Sunimit said.

Thai traditions: Lese majeste in Thailand
By FRANK G. ANDERSON
United Press International: April 28, 2008

http://www.upiasiaonline.com/Human_Rights/2008/04/28/lese_majeste_in_thailand/2852/

Thailand’s most powerful political and social “hammer” may be the kingdom’s lese majeste law…However, whether you are ever convicted and punished or not is a question of who you are, who you happened to offend and who is protecting your interests. The law is supposedly designed to protect the country’s revered monarchy, but is often misused to silence dissent, punish social and political enemies, or to employ against foreigners when Thais would face far less severe charges. Politicians, power brokers and colluding police all benefit from the application — or merely the threat to apply — the lese majeste law…Having witnessed — as a victim — the misuse of the lese majesty law in Thailand, this writer cautions foreigners first and foremost that the real danger is not merely saying the wrong thing, but in being perceived so by police or other powerful interests who themselves do not always have real national interests at stake. The higher up your accusers are, and the better connected they are with the military and police, and most importantly, with powerful politicians, the more chance you stand of being convicted… A powerful tool to silence protests, arouse public support and justify massive armed attacks against democracy protest groups, the lese majeste law in Thailand has faced frequent and strong protest, as well as both internal and external pressures for repeal. It may be that unless the nation’s monarch himself calls for repeal, the law will remain on the books for decades more…The suggestion that Thailand’s lese majeste law be amended to where only the nation’s monarch issues any such charge is a workable idea but faces overwhelming resistance in the Land of Smiles from powerful interests who have grown used to misusing the law for their own gain and others’ losses. If the country’s powerful police cannot yet bring themselves to repeal the law, then perhaps they can amend provisions in its enforcement to ensure that legitimate rights are protected on the one hand, and that persons filing lese majeste charges are made well aware of their obligations and possible repercussions from malicious filing…In a document provided to Thai police on this subject, this writer asked that any individual signing a complaint of lese majeste swear that he or she has no personal conflict with the charged person, and that the person filing also accepts that should the charge be found to be malicious or without foundation, that the individual making allegations accept responsibility. Almost a year after receiving the suggestions, police have not bothered to respond. It is not in their interests to do so…The suggestion that Thailand’s lese majeste law be amended to where only the nation’s monarch issues any such charge is a workable idea but faces overwhelming resistance in the Land of Smiles from powerful interests who have grown used to misusing the law for their own gain and others’ losses. If the country’s powerful police cannot yet bring themselves to repeal the law, then perhaps they can amend provisions in its enforcement to ensure that legitimate rights are protected on the one hand, and that persons filing lese majeste charges are made well aware of their obligations and possible repercussions from malicious filing…In a document provided to Thai police on this subject, this writer asked that any individual signing a complaint of lese majeste swear that he or she has no personal conflict with the charged person, and that the person filing also accepts that should the charge be found to be malicious or without foundation, that the individual making allegations accept responsibility. Almost a year after receiving the suggestions, police have not bothered to respond. It is not in their interests to do so.

(Frank G. Anderson is the Thailand representative of American Citizens Abroad. He was a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer to Thailand from 1965-67, working in community development. A freelance writer and founder of northeast Thailand’s first local English language newspaper, the Korat Post — www.thekoratpost.com — he has spent over eight years in Thailand “embedded” with the local media.)

Time to abolish the lèse majesté law in Thailand
Giles Ji Ungpakorn, Chulalongkorn University

http://rspas.anu.edu.au/rmap/newmandala/2008/05/03/ji-ungpakorn-on-the-abolition-of-lese-majeste/

Once again we are seeing the extreme Right in Thailand using lèse majesté as an excuse to encourage acts of violence against those who stand up for freedom and justice…Manager is opening its web-pages to Right-Wing thugs who want to encourage violence against Chotisak Onsoong because he chose to think differently and not stand for the King’s song in the cinema. Following this there have been threats of violence, also posted on The Manager website, against Jittra Kotchadej, Chairwoman of the Triumph textile workers union. Her supposed “crime” was to wear a T-shirt supporting Chotisak’s freedom of expression. In both cases, their addresses have been published by The Manager. The actions by Manager are not only illegal in that they encourage violence against others, but they are also a serious obstacle to basic rights and democracy…The fact that lèse majesté is an excuse to silence and use violence against those who think differently is merely one of many reasons why the law should be abolished…The second reason to abolish lèse majesté, as a matter of urgency, is that it is an authoritarian law of the type found in countries with Absolute Monarchies. No modern civilised and democratic nation in the world maintains such a law. If we are to have democracy we must have the right to express ourselves. There must be the right to criticise the Monarchy. Otherwise the Monarch or members of the Royal Family can behave as they like without any accountability or transparency. Lèse majesté laws actually indicate that the Conservatives are afraid that if they allow criticism we shall see that many many Thais have different opinions. The constructed image of the Monarchy will also face serious scrutiny. In other words, the Conservatives are afraid of the truth. If not, why not dare to abolish lèse majesté?

Tax Bill Fuels a Canadian Debate on Film Censorship
By IAN AUSTEN
Published: May 3, 2008

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/03/movies/03cens.html?ref=todayspaper

Most Canadian films and non-news television programs apply for a government cash payment, which is described as a tax credit, to offset some of their labor costs…Payments typically cover about 10 to 12 percent of a production’s budget…Filmmakers apply in advance for a certificate declaring their project sufficiently Canadian. The government’s payment, however, does not arrive until the film or television series is completed and it is again reviewed…It is that second review that the government hopes to expand. The change would allow the minister of Canadian heritage, an elected official, to “also certify that the public funding of the production would not be contrary to public policy.”…That broadness of the extra review is the chief concern of the writers, filmmakers, actors and free-speech groups who have visited the Senate over the past few weeks. They argue that it would allow the government to cut funds and, in effect, censor films that offend any number of moral, religious or political views…Heritage minister Josée Verner said that the measure was not an attempt at censorship but simply a way to block subsidies for films that are “potentially illegal under the criminal code, such as indecent material, hate propaganda and child pornography.” Ms. Verner did not explain why current guidelines that ban makers of pornographic films, among other things, from even applying for grants were inadequate..Finance minister .Jim Flaherty said that the proposed change represents “the will of the people” and that its defeat by the opposition parties, most of which are not ready for a campaign, would cause an immediate general election.

Feds Valiantly Fighting to Protect You from Porn
by Susie Bright
AlterNet: May 2, 2008

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/sex/84289/

Somewhere in Washington a U.S. Attorney is hard at work watching porn. Pun intended…The screening room hasn’t shut down. The feds are watching more porn than ever. The ones that freak them out the most aren’t the hard cocks, the interracial sex, the homosexual taboos that so often frequented past federal investigations. That’s so 80s…No, the movies they’re going after this time, are a milestone in obscenity trials. No one ever used to pay attention to female orgasm in porn tapes before … it was like Queen Victoria dismissing lesbianism. It just didn’t count for them. Dick was all that mattered…In Milk Nymphos, Storm Squirters, and Fetish Fanatic 5 , the one common element is women simulating orgasm, and demonstrating such by squirting up a storm. The scenes are surreal, they’re so inauthentic, but what’s remarkable, in legal history, is that the ostensible pleasure on screen is depicting the thrill of female orgasm…The feds want to make visible female excitement an obscenity.

The History of Banned and Censored Cartoons

http://banned-cartoons.com/

Between 1930 and 1950, animators at Warner Brothers, Walt Disney, MGM, Merrie Melodies, Looney Tunes, R.K.O., and many other independent studios, produced thousands of cartoons containing racial stereotypes and references to alcohol, adultery, female anatomy, cross-dressing, gambling, marijuana, pornography, sexual situations, smoking, and suicides (i.e. a frustrated Bugs Bunny blows himself up)…This was during what is now known as the golden age of animation, and until the mid 1960s, cartoons were screened before all feature films. Later, these same cartoons would cycle endlessly for decades on broadcast TV or cable syndication. To modern audiences, many of these cartoons are quite shocking and graphically illustrate how pervasive and institutionalized racism was in our culture just a short time ago…Ownership of Warner Bros. cartoons passed to United Artists in 1968 and they created a “Censored 11″ list of cartoons they refused to air or make available for purchase on any media.