Thai media misquote sparks UN outrage
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 24, 2011 The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP) issued quite an angry press release Friday over what seems to be a misquotation in a Thai media outlet:
The United Nations has demanded an immediate retraction from the Thai ASEAN News Network for the serious misquotes of Dr. Noeleen Heyzer, United Nations Under-Secretary General and Executive Secretary of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific in a story that ran this week.
The story, which revolved around the flood situation in Thailand, falsely attributed quotes to Dr. Heyzer that criticized the government.
The reality: the United Nations has issued no statement criticizing the government, and has only offered support and assistance as Thailand faces the worse floods in more than six decades.
“These quotes are completely contrary to the solidarity and support that the United Nations is giving in Thailand,” said Dr. Heyzer. “The quotes are totally wrong and a poor reflection of journalist standards that are meant to reflect the truth.”
"United Nations Demands Retraction from Thai ASEAN News Network" (PDF), UNESCAP press release, October 21, 2011
Ouch! It takes a lot to get the United Nations to release an angry statement and it is definitely not the first time the Thai media outlets have botched something up (while some would say that Dr. Heyzer's assessment in the last sentence may be overly optimistic).
The Thai ASEAN News Network (TAN) is a full English-language news channel and an offshoot of ASTV, the TV outlet of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) - the ultra-nationalistic yellow shirts (by the way, ASTV is now off-air because of unpaid bills). Nevertheless, TAN claims to be "absolutely independent from ASTV". We have previously highlighted one of their recent blunders here.
But what was the actual misquote? Many, including the fellow bloggers over at Thai Political Prisoners, hint at an article titled "UN Blames Govt for Poor Flood Management". Some excerpts:
The United Nations has warned that natural disasters and floods in ASEAN are triggering a humanitarian crisis, claiming that no integrated effort to solve the turmoil will result in failure in tackling the after effects.
The Voice of America or VOA has reported that natural disasters in Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and the Philippines have killed more than 700 people already and affected eight million residents.(...)
UN ESCAP Executive Secretary Noeleen Heyzer said the UN is ready to give assistance to communities that have been affected by the flood crisis.
Meanwhile, Jerry Velasquez, senior regional coordinator for UN/ISDR Asia & Pacific pointed out that the main weakness to tackling the flood crisis in Thailand is the abundance of organizations to oversee water management.
He noted the Thai government has failed to streamline the eight agencies involved, resulting in policies going in different directions.
Velasquez said this problem is not only limited to Thailand but is being seen in other countries in the region. He further warned that this crisis may be just a prelude to future natural calamities.
"UN Blames Govt for Poor Flood Management", Thai ASEAN News Network, last updated on October 20, 2011 - emphasis by me
While it is possible that TAN has edited the post several times (also possibly as a reaction to the press release), if there were any quotes by Heyzer being critical towards the Thai government, they are not there anymore. The majority of the story is lifted from Voice of America (VOA), including the quotes by Jerry Velasquez, senior regional coordinator with the UN’s International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR).
However, the problem is the undoubtedly loaded and misleading headline TAN has given this piece, since this is of course what readers see first. That sets the mood for the rest of the article, no matter if something else in written in the text. So, in the end it is not necessarily exactly what was written or quoted that was misleading, but how the UN is portrayed here by the headline alone.
Is the UN right to demand a retraction because of a misquote? Not really, since there does not seem to be a misquote (anymore). Is the UN right to be angry because of of this TAN story? Absolutely! International organizations like the UN cannot appear to be partisan if they need to work with the authorities, especially during natural disasters. On the other hand, while it is important to criticize the federal and local governments for their failures in preventing and handling this year's flood, sticking to the truth is something that many Thai media outlets like to neglect when it does not serve an editorial line.
UPDATE: TAN has meanwhile issued an apology:
To Whom It May Concern,
On Friday, October 21, 2011, the Thai-ASEAN News (TAN) Network broadcasted a news story entitled “UN Blames Govt for Poor Flood Management”. The story quoted UN ESCAP Executive Secretary Noeleen Heyzer for something she did not say. However, in actuality, the quote belonged to Jerry Velasquez, senior regional coordinator for UN/ISDR Asia & Pacific.
Once informed of the misquote, TAN Network corrected the story on the evening of Friday, October 21, 2011. The corrected version can still be found at http://www.tannetwork.tv/tan/ViewData.aspx?DataID=1048976.
There is no excuse for the mistake that was made. TAN Network, its management and its editorial team sincerely apologizes for the error that was made. However, we must stress that there were no ill intensions.
This incident has served as an important lesson to all of our staff. We apologize and will do our utmost to never allow this to happen again in the future.
Our sincere apologies.
The Thai-ASEAN News Network
Bangkok, Thailand
October 24, 2011
There's is one slight contradiction though: the contested headline was still up earlier this morning and has been just changed, definitely after this post went up. But at least it is something commendable that a Thai media outlet actually does issue an apology and does not simply delete their traces.
Note: Thanks to all the Twitter users for pointers!
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
International pressure mounts against Thailand's Lese Majeste law
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 14, 2011 The rising awareness of Thailand's draconian lèse majesté law is gaining scrutiny from the international community after several countries have questioned and criticized Article 112 of Thailand's criminal code during a Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Every four years, all members of the United Nations are required to submit a report about its human rights situation, and be questioned on it by other states. If you have the time you can watch all (and I mean ALL) hearings towards Thailand's report, go here.
Pravit Rojanaphruk wrote in The Nation:
Representatives from the United Kingdom, France and Slovenia shared the view that the lese majeste law affected freedom of expression and urged Thailand to consider this aspect of liberty. Hungary and Finland urged Thailand to invite the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression to visit Thailand.
The representative of Norway - also a kingdom - made the most concrete suggestion, pointing out that although Norway has a lese majeste law, a charge can only be brought with the personal approval of the king in order to "avoid abuses". (...)
Other states whose representatives urged Thailand to amend the law included Switzerland, Brazil, Spain, Sweden and New Zealand. Some of these, including the Canadian representative, also raised the issue of the Computer Crimes Act, which critics say is also being used by the Thai government to curb freedom of expression.
"US mum on lese majeste law at UN rights hearing", by Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, October 7, 2011
ARTICLE 19, an UK-based NGO advocating freedom of expression, were also present during the hearing and have caught this (and be sure to read former Siam Voices contributor Andrew Spooner's interview with ARTICLE 19's Senior Programme Officer for Asia):
Recommendations to Thailand to repeal or review the lèse-majesté law (Article 112 of Thailand’s Penal Code) and the Computer Crime Act (2007) were made by fourteen member states, including Western European countries, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil and Indonesia.
Indonesia was the only member state of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) to highlight the issue of freedom of expression in Thailand, a fellow member. It urged Thailand to carry out a comprehensive review of its laws to ensure that they fulfil the right to freedom of expression in accordance to international standards.
"Spotlight on Thailand’s Lèse-Majesté Law and Computer Crimes Act", ARTICLE 19, October 6, 2011
However, not all countries have raised their concerns towards Thailand:
The United States joined China, Syria, Singapore and Burma in not expressing any concern about the lese majeste law, (...).
"US mum on lese majeste law at UN rights hearing", by Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, October 7, 2011
This is seemingly the first time vocal opposition against lèse majesté has been come in that quantity from the international community. British MPs lobbied for Prachatai webmaster Chinranuch Premchaiporn, whose trial continued in the past few weeks (see here), but due to the current flood situation, will continue in February 2012.
Another case mentioned during the questioning at the UPR was the trial against Joe Gordon, a Thai-born American arrested back in May for allegedly posting a link to a banned unauthorized biography of King Bhumibol Adulyadej and also allegedly translating parts of this book and later posted it on his blog. This was done while he was still in the United States, but was then arrested when he came to Thailand for medical treatment. His case started earlier this week, where Gordon pleaded guilty, in hope for a shorter sentence and eventually a royal pardon, something that has become almost standard procedure in similar cases of recent years.
Even more international criticism comes from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, who also urged Thailand in a press release to amend its laws:
“The threat of a long prison sentence and vagueness of what kinds of expression constitute defamation, insult, or threat to the monarchy, encourage self-censorship and stifle important debates on matters of public interest, thus putting in jeopardy the right to freedom of opinion and expression,” La Rue said. “This is exacerbated by the fact that the charges can be brought by private individuals and trials are often closed to the public.” (...)
However, to prevent any abuse of this exceptional rule for purposes beyond the intended aim, any law that limits the right to freedom of expression must be clear and unambiguous regarding the specific type of expression that is prohibited, and proven to be necessary and proportionate for the intended purposes.
“The Thai penal code and the Computer Crimes Act do not meet these criteria. The laws are vague and overly broad, and the harsh criminal sanctions are neither necessary nor proportionate to protect the monarchy or national security,” the expert noted.
"Thailand / Freedom of expression: UN expert recommends amendment of lèse majesté laws", Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations Human Rights Council, October 10, 2011
The special rapporteur rightfully points out the weaknesses of the laws that leave too much room for interpretation and the accused are likely to become, especially in these political times, victims of arbitrary acts by the authorities. While the Thai representatives at the hearing argue that the Thai government is "keen to prevent the misuse of the law", something that the Abhisit administration had promised but failed to deliver, and that "an ongoing debate on lese majeste law" is taking place, though failing to see how public and how thorough the debate still can not go.
Also, Thai Ambassador to the UN Sihasak Phuangketkeow says that Thai media can report and comment "freely". Again, while Thailand is still a far way from becoming the new Burma, the extent to which one can fully comment and report on the political developments in Thailand is highly limited, considering that there are more powers at play than those we elect.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Tongue-Thai’ed! Part IX: The 'Cib that Frabs' - Dems target PM Yingluck's gaffes
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 5, 2011 “Tongue-Thai’ed!” encapsulates the most baffling, amusing, confusing, outrageous and appalling quotes from Thai politicians and other public figures – in short: everything we hear that makes us go “Huh?!”. Check out all past entries here.
Last Sunday the Twitter account of prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra was 'hacked' - or rather somebody knows the password already or has guessed it correctly, which isn't necessarily 'hacking'.
There is a German saying that goes, "Who has the damage, doesn't need to provide for the ridicule". And to add injury to insult, Miss Chitpas Bhirombhakdi, the daughter of the executive vice-president of Singha Corporation, thus often-referred to as the “Singha-heiress” and now deputy spokeswoman for the now opposition Democrat Party (read about her debut here), has tweeted on Monday morning:
สื่อของ ยิ่งลักษณ์ นับวันจะถูกบีบให้เหลือน้อยลง สัมภาษณ์สดก็ไม่ได้ ออกทีวีก็ไม่เป็น ออกวิทยุก็พูดผิด ทวิตเตอร์ก็ถูกปิด ทีมงานเหนื่อย!
Yingluck's media outlets are dwindling by the days - she doesn't give live interviews, doesn 't do TV, mixes things up on [her] radio [show], now [her] Twitter [account] got closed! Her staff's exhausted!
Tweet by @TANTchitpas on October 3, 2011 at 08:41:48 , translation by me
This is the latest in a string of mocks and roasts against Yingluck and her government ever since the Democrat Party was booted out. Here's just a selection of attacks by the Democrat Party. Astonishingly and strangely enough, in a The Nation article on Yingluck's Twitter mishaps the editors somehow sneaked in a whole paragraph with something that has nothing to do with the actual story:
Yingluck also came under criticism from Democrat spokesman Chavanont Intarakolmalyasut for mispronouncing ya faek (vetiver grass) as ya praek (pesty grass). "Even when the prime minister was reading a script, she read it wrong," he said.
She should apologise for her slip-up during her weekly radio address, he said, adding that he did not think it would be funny if 15.7 million Pheu Thai supporters decided to grow weeds instead of vetiver grass for flood prevention.
Democrat MP Watchara Phetthong said Yingluck had made too many gaffes lately. Her misleading remarks about the Navy's submarine procurement request came just last week, followed by the inability to distinguish between the grass to prevent soil erosion and the weed, he said.
"Hacker of PM's twitter account 'identified'", The Nation, October 4, 2011
Before that several Democrat MPs have called the either Yingluck or her government a "puppet PM", being "obessed with helping Thaksin" and one even her a "ninja" - all that only just happened last September!
But the cake takes the aforementioned Watchara Petchthong who said this after Yingluck's radio slip-up:
"ผมถือได้ว่ารัฐบาลชุดนี้หลอกลวงพี่น้องประชาชน น่าจะเรียกได้ว่าเป็นรัฐบาล “แปตอหลู” และผมยืนยันว่าจะเรียกรัฐบาลว่าอย่างนี้ (...)"
"I say that this government has fooled the people, so you can say this government is a "cib that frabs" and I insist to [continue] call this government [like this] (...)"
"ส.ส.ปชป.ให้ฉายา'แปตอหลู' จี้นายกฯขอโทษพูดผิด", Thai Rath, October 2, 2011
Now, in order to understand what Watchara has called this government, we have to explain what "cib that frabs" or in original "แปตอหลู" (pronounced bae-dtoh-loo) actually means: If you want say something indirectly in Thai, people like to swap out letters that results in total gibberish. But if you put it into the right order, you would get "ปูตอแหล" (pronounced "pou-dtoh-lae"). ปู ("Pou") is Yingluck's nickname, while "ตอแหล" ("dtoh-lae") means to lie or to fib, though this word is only used for women. All in all then we would get the "crab that fibs" - which is a rather convoluted way to say that this government is lying.
While it is important that an opposition keeps the government in check and gives a nudge here and there when the occasion arises, it is interesting, if not revealing, to see how they criticize and for what and also what they actually say.
Just because we have a new government, it doesn’t mean they all suddenly stop saying stupid things. If you come across any verbosities that you think might fit in here send us an email at siamvoices [at] gmail.com or tweet us @siamvoices.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Subs or choppers? Thailand's military build-up hits a snag
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 4, 2011 The Nation wrote last week:
The Cabinet on Tuesday approved the naval proposal to buy six U-206 submarines, worth Bt6.9 billion, from Germany, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said. (...)
The approval came as the last minute before the deal would expire on September 30.
The six submarines would be decommissioned by the German Navy. Four would be refurbished before the deployment in the Gulf of Thailand and two are slated for spare parts.
"Purchase of six used submarines approved: Yingluck", The Nation, September 27, 2011
Back in January, the Thai Navy voiced interest in buying two used submarines from the German Navy at an estimated cost of 6-7 billion Baht (US$195m - $228m). Over the course of the year the offer has increased to buy six submarines for about $257m from Germany, while there was a competing offer from Korea (source in German here). With this planned purchase, the Thai Navy is meant to launch its long-held ambitious plans to set up a submarine fleet, despite the doubtful strategic utilization. For one, the Gulf of Thailand is said to be too shallow for submarines.
However...
Leaving the [cabinet] meeting, Yingluck appeared slightly confused when asked if the Cabinet gave the green light to separate military plans to buy the German submarines and US-made Blackhawk helicopters.
"I don't recall that. The Cabinet discussed 37 points today [yesterday] and had no reservation. Regarding the submarine plan, it has been approved. But for the Blackhawks, there's some issues about the price that requires a discussion with the Budget Bureau," she said early yesterday afternoon.
However, about two hours later, after the prime minister's words had been reported by the online media, deputy government spokesman Chalitrat Chantharubeksa walked through the afternoon rain to the Government House press room to correct the prime minister's statement.
He said that the Cabinet did not consider the submarine-purchase plan yesterday.
"The prime minister may be mixed up between submarines and helicopters. In fact, she referred to helicopters," the deputy spokesman said, adding that the Army request to buy eight French-made helicopters was approved by the Cabinet. "She thought the question was about the eight helicopters."
He also joked that the inaccurate media reports stemming from the prime minister's "mix-up" might have "caused the Navy to be happy".
"PM's submarine 'mix-up'", The Nation, September 28, 2011
That is, of course, a completely different subject. As the Thai military has suffered the loss of three Bell 121 Huey helicopters within just over a week in July, killing a total of 17 people, the military officials have grounded all helicopters of that type and demanded new ones. That now seems to be the case - unless the government got something mixed up again...!
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Thai PM Yingluck's Twitter account hacked
Originally published at Siam Voices on October 2, 2011 The Twitter account of Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra (@PouYingluck) has apparently been taken over by hackers on Sunday morning between 10.22am and 10.43am, and sent out tweets which were critical of the government and its policies. So far, there have been eight such tweets:
This country is a business. We serve our own, not the Thai people. We do this for those who support/sponsor us, not those who disagree with us.
Where are the chances for the poor people? We have have exploited the poor, gave them hope only for their votes so that our group can benefit from it.
Where is the sustainability? Solving the flood problems isn't just looking good for the pictures but a collective effort of those with knowledge to find a long-term solution.
Is it time already that our country changes for the better, not just for looking good for the pictures in order to capitalize for their own corporations, relatives and the others who benefit.
The most important thing for this country is education. Why are they handing out tablet [PCs] but not fixing the curriculum or support the teachers by paying [them] more?
Why are [we] fixated by mega projects [such as] the mass landfill, building the world's tallest buildings, which doesn't have to do anything with this country.
Thailand needs change! It's time that everybody in this country wakes up! The stupidity must end!
If she cannot protect her own Twitter account, how can this country be protected then? Think about it...
At this time nothing is known about the people behind these messages other than the fact that the last word in the last tweet is the politeness-particle ครับ ("khrap"), which exposes the hacker to be male. At the time of publishing the tweets are still there, but according to TAN Network, the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology has been "informed and is investigating".
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.
Raunchy 'Itchy Ear' song exposes Thai sexual hypocrisy
Originally published at Siam Voices on September 29, 2011 A music video with suggestive lyrics, the singer's even more suggestive stage performance, and her moral scolding on national TV is the latest episode of yet another Thai sexual hypocrisy. Yet again, the outcry comes from those who claim to protect anything 'Thai' and lash out against everything that is allegedly not, while willfully ignoring the naked truth(s).
So, what happened? In June, a Thai band called Turbo Music uploaded a video of a performance of their song "Itchy Ear" (คันหู), which is about...
The song itself is a tale of a young lady with an itchy ear (khan huu, คันหู) that won’t go away. Packed with double-entendre (and invitations for vowel substitution), the song relates her quest for relief: she has tried a cotton-bud, but to no avail (เอาสำลี มาปั่น ก็ไม่หาย). Perhaps the itch was caused by some water getting in when she was showering washing her hair (อาบน้ำ สระหัว น้ำคงเข้า). She asks her mother for something to fix it (แม่จ๋า หายา ให้หนูหน่อย). The singer explains that when she was a child it didn’t ever itch (ตอนเด็กๆ ไม่เคยคันซักที) but it started just two or three years after she became a young woman (พอเริ่มเป็นสาว ได้แค่สองสามปี หูก็เริ่มมี อาการ คันคัน). If anyone can give her a cure, she will give them anything. She will drink it or inject it (once or twice if necessary) so long as it is good medicine (จะกินฉีด ขอให้เป็นยาดี จะลองให้ฉีด ยาสักทีสองที ถ้ายาเค้าดี หูคงหายคัน).
"คันหู : Nong Ja ahead of Democrats!", by Andrew Walker, New Mandala, September 14, 2011
But watching the performance of the 20-year-old singer Nong Ja aka Ja Turbo, it is pretty clear, even to those who didn't get the innuendos the first time around, that 'itchy ear' means something completely different:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkjbnjJlFDk
Maybe that's why the viewing figures skyrocketed within a few weeks, reaching over 15 million clicks at the time of publication. Much of the popularity could also be attributed to the almost unsurprising outrage over the raunchy pop song. The most striking example of high-profile indignation was the singer's appearance on "Woody - Born to Talk" (วู้ดดี้ - เกิดมาคุย) with Woody Militachinda on September 4. In a recent column, Pavin Chachavalpongpun describes the interview as this:
The interview was intensely discomforting. Woody acted as a typical stuck up Thai hi-so who proclaimed himself to be the defender of Thai morality. The way Woody communicated with Ja Turbo, the way he posed his questions and how he responded to her answers, all contained highly unpleasant value judgements on the part of the host. The show succeeded in unveiling a dark reality in Thai society: there remains an impenetrable barricade when it comes to "class". This barricade is responsible for the current crisis facing the country today.
Woody exercised his "class superiority" and his supposed better upbringing in an attempt to disgrace Ja Turbo, who was a guest on his show. He asked insulting questions and made offensive remarks about her. These are some of Woody's statements: "How can a song like this exist in this society?" "Is there really this type of girl, like you, in our society?" "Didn't you feel ashamed when you lifted your legs in the air?" "Is your act some kind of low-class art?" "Are there parents out there who would tolerate daughters like yourself?" "Have you ever thought for a moment that you are committing something so immoral?" "Do you consider yourself a decent entertainer?"
Woody's questions may have been harsh. But his attitude towards Ja Turbo was even more callous. It seemed that he didn't even want to breathe the same air as her let alone sit in the same room with her. He grilled her in front of Thai viewers, believing that his supercilious attitude would earn him an even higher place in a society where morality and ethics are seemingly the exclusive assets of the phu dee, or those of a "higher class".
"Hi-so hypocrites as shameless as immoral low-so entertainers", by Pavin Chachavalpongpun, The Nation, September 28, 2011
Woody wasn't really being host rather than being a smug interrogator, lecturing her about what he thinks is morality and 'Thainess' - yet another self-proclaimed cultural herald! While the music act itself is debatable, the constant attack and poorly hidden antipathy by him is not only cheap entertainment at the cost of another person, but also a deeply delusional understanding of what is appropriate and who actually decides on this.
Most of all, this is a business. It's not the first time the music industry or entertainment in general have pushed the envelope on what is dictated by others to be 'decent'. It is not the first time that sexuality has been used as a subject and this will not be the last time that someone will take offense from this. While the likes of Turbo Music are cashing in on the always reliable 'sex sells' routine, Woody cashes in by openly bashing another person and still claiming the higher ground.
This selective outcry on the public depiction of sexuality is reminiscent of an incident earlier this year in April, when three women were seen dancing topless in public during Songkran (Thai New Year). Somebody shot and uploaded the video, much to the anger of the self-proclaimed cultural heralds, especially the then culture minister who openly advocated a crackdown on them for "negatively affect Thailand's reputation" - it turns out those girls were underage. We interviewed Thai author "Kaewmala" about the causes and motives of this seemingly predictable outrage and why some Thais seem to struggle with sexuality. Among others (I recommend you to re-read the whole interview), she saw the problem as this:
Sexuality both is and isn’t taboo in Thailand. It is taboo only when it’s inconvenient or causes embarrassment (real or perceived). Thais like to think that we are a conservative and proper society when we really aren’t – at least behind closed doors. People have a delusion that Thai kids are too innocent to be contaminated by sex education, another area of inability to deal with facts. There are people who actually buy into the ideal Thai Culture line (good, grand, long-lived, sexually innocent or sexless, religiously Buddhist). And these people will not tolerate any deviation from this ideal and would sing the chorus to the occasional outcries, whenever the media drum one up. Like most cultures, much of the Thai Culture is sexualized (mostly involving females) and people are drawn to sex.
"“Only taboo when it’s inconvenient!” – Interview with Thai author Kaewmala on the outrage at topless Songkran dancers", Siam Voices, April 19, 2011
All in all, this whole (made-up) controversy did Nong Ja and her band more good than harm, becoming an online sensation and adding some notoriety to their newly gained popularity, while the cultural heralds are still seemingly trying to wrap their head around the times we live in today.
Saksith Saiyasombut is a Thai blogger and journalist currently based in Bangkok, Thailand. He can be followed on Twitter @Saksith and now also on his public Facebook page here.