SiliconValley.com
Yesterday, April 9th, Thailand demanded that "one of the country's most popular chat sites to shut its political forum because of postings deemed insulting to the revered monarch." The site, pantip.com, criticized a number of government issues including the monarch and military, and was closed for concerns over what the government felt to be national security issues.
Moreover, the Thai government is demanding the removal of videos posted on YouTube that criticize the country's king, an action that over 1,00 people have since posted messages about. While YouTube is refusing to take down the media, Google is currently trying to resolve the issue with Thailand officials. Although pantip.com is operating under the legislation of the Thai government, YouTube is governed by American laws. Thus, the issue at hand is the conflicting rights to freedom of expression. Should YouTube be able to post media bashing another country's leader considering the videos are viewable globally? Which country's laws should apply here?
I think in the case of political figures, such as Thailand's king, or even our own George Bush, laws of slander and the like often do not apply. I'm not sure why it is okay to fabricate stories or post falsities about an individual when they are in a position of power, yet the average citizen would not stand for the same treatment. We are very protective of our own rights, yet expensing that of other individuals for humor's sake is okay. Nonetheless, I honestly could care less about the mocking of national leaders, or even our own president for that matter. A lot of the stuff posted by users of the site is very entertaining, and trampling the rights of others should apply to the King of Thailand and average Joe alike.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment