[7kitthuptarill]

I think so too Seeker, I know there are many times that I want to see other viewpoints that many countries probably have banned on their IP ranges. I for one do not wish to have a cyber-Disneyland while I am looking for something that can not be found in textbooks. I prefer to avoid the PC crap, personally. Too, I am sure there are plenty of people searching for pornography as well, that does not make them rapists. But the concept that many organizations and governments are considering is if they can prevent one rape, a terrorist attack, or even the spreading of crack cocaine recipes, then they will take that route. I can certainly understand why.

Though the majority are capable of handling the access to such information responsibly, there are always the few who will try to make a pipe bomb. As you say Seeker, Utopia. No possible way to restrict the flow of information, but I do admire the efforts that are put forth. Most of it is done with good intentions. But like anything else, if it is something not easily available people will make it a point to search it out.

[7kitthuptarill]

I would have no problem with censorship in this area. But I would have no problem living in Thailand either. The one's who would not be able to cope with this 'horrible torturous in-humane treatment' should really ask themselves who they are trying to fool.

10 years ago as a student, I would have been disgusted by it. But now, a few children later, and alot of grey hair, I really don't understand why this is a big deal. Do you all really need these porn sites? What is wrong with simply using Google as a search engine for everything? I would never even feel the need for an anonimizer proxy. I just don't do enough, I guess.

[ErnestTU]

i haven't read the above so carefully but my internet provider blocks some porn websites that don't suit children to surf.

anyway, you can still go to it by beating about the bush lol

[worldofwarcraft]

Quote[/b] (Stacker @ Jan. 28 2005,04:07)]I really don't understand why this is a big deal. Do you all really need these porn sites?

There is more to it than just porn and gambling sites. The last time I looked there were 22,254 web sites being blocked and this list is growing larger every day. About 2,660 web sites have been blocked for "Threatening National Security". The question is, what are the guidelines for banning the web sites in this category? It wasn't that long ago that two journalists were kicked out of the country for saying the wrong thing.

Quote[/b] (Stacker @ Jan. 28 2005,04:07)]I would have no problem living in Thailand either.

I think you would have a lot of problems. It is not advisable to openly criticize the government or institution. Having your web site blocked would be the least of your worries. Do I need to say what may happen to you and your family if you step on too many toes? Or publicly critizise the wrong person?

On our web sites, we maintain self-censorship in order to survive. That includes what other people say or what pictures they post on our forums. Life is too short.

Quote[/b] (Mike @ Jan. 28 2005,01:12)]if I try and access any of the major sites listing proxy servers then I'm informed access to them is banned.

Strangely, we can access www.ladbrokes.com. (Of course we would never normally go to this web site and we only went there today because you asked us to.) It is interesting to note that on the front page of ladbrokes.com there is a dozen languages listed. One of them is Thai!

BTW, we did a bit of censorship on your post. Hope you don't mind. I wouldn't be surprised if links to 203.107.138.4 are logged and someone will follow the breadcrumbs back here. Not that we have anything to hide of course. We never do anything illegal here. But better safe than sorry.

We advise people to approach the above web sites with caution. If you choose to open any of the links then you do so at your own peril. We will not be held responsible for any harm that may be caused to you.

[opelayday]

I came across this report on internet censorship in Thailand, and wondered if anyone had any thoughts ?

Quote[/b] ]The government filters Internet traffic to fight child-porn but has extended censorship far beyond this kind of material.

Clear government policy and a national constitution (1997) that firmly protects freedom of expression encourage growth of the Internet. More than 10 per cent of Thais have Internet access and news sites are flourishing.

The Internet is regulated by the National Information Technology Committee (NITC), the National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC), the Telephone Organisation of Thailand (TOT) and the Communications Authority of Thailand (CAT). The rise of such bodies has hindered Internet growth more than helped it.

The CAT by law has a minimum 32 per cent share in the country's 18 privately-owned ISPs, which gives the government great influence over them and enables it to impose filtering more easily. No laws specifically regulate the Internet.

Covert censorship

The NITC said in July 2001 it would hunt down "unsuitable content" on the Internet and has since censored material, mostly pornography. But it has also blocked access to online gambling, material criticising the king and even personal webpages that mention official corruption.

The NITC regularly sends a list of banned websites (currently about 1,000) to ISPs, which are required to block them. Some block IP addresses, others domain names, which explains why censorship is not the exactly same in different parts of the country.

The government's filtering method is covert. Users connecting to a censored publication do not get a "access refused" message but one saying "site unknown" or "server error." An easy way round this censorship is to use anonymizers, which are proxies accessible on the Web.

Links

- The Communications Authority of Thailand
www.cat.or.th/eng

- The Nation media group
www.nationmultimedia.com

- Statistics about the Internet in Thailand
http://ntl.nectec.or.th/internet/index.html

- Government site about growth of new technology (in Thai)
www.ictlaw.thaigov.net

Now I've never actually come across a banned page during normal surfing so far (although I sometimes get mysterious 'Bad Gateway' errors on some sites e.g. www.siam-bangna.co.th/ which I never seemed to get in the UK), but I thought I'd try out the articles claim about proxy servers. It says "an easy way round it is to use anonymizers, which are proxies accessible on the Web." if I try any access any of the major sites listing proxy servers - such as www.stayinvisible.com/, www.publicproxyservers.com , http://www.proxy4free.com - then I'm informed access to them is banned and I'm redirected to http://203.107.138.4/ . Gambling sites like http://www.sportingbet.com/ and http://www.ladbrokes.com/ give the same result. More controversially, the PULO website (PULO being the group fighting for a seperate state in southern Thailand, often accused of being a terrorist group) is banned too http://www.pulo.org/ , as are similar sites such as http://www.manusaya.com/ . http://www.laosearch.net/ , which seems to be just a general Laos portal site, is also banned. From looking at one of the police websites, it seems it's nearer 20000 sites banned rather than 1000, the vast majority of them pornographic ones (if only the government could tackle the problem of prostitution with the same vigour as it tackles the websites! ).

Can anyone else in Thailand at the moment access these sites ? (They can be accessed via the google cache) What happens if you try ? Who knows what else my ISP (KSC) is doing too, logging my phone number and red-flagging me for accessing a banned site perhaps ? Is this kind of censorship justified, especially as there doesn't seem to be a fixed definition for "unsuitable content" ? And, as there's a general perception that under Thaksin the media has become less free and that many state organisations have become less independent, is there a chance this will be used to block sites that are 'libellous' to the PM ? Perhaps this is already happening, there doesn't seem to be any way of knowing for sure.

I can see why they'd block child porn, but if they also block sites about the royal family and about corrupt officials is that really that different from what happens in China ? The difference of course is that "the great firewall of China" is widely known and criticised, while this in Thailand seems to have gone unnoticed by just about everyone. What does anyone think, is this justifiable ??

(Edit: URLs deliberatly unlinked to reduce the trace back to here)

[7kitthuptarill]

I feel bad, Mike I think you really misunderstood the thoughts I intended to convey. As I did yours, as well. Sorry for the huge reply, I am only trying to explain myself a bit more clearly on each matter brought up.


The needing of the p0rn sites, I meant it in a rhetorrical manner. Obviously nobody does, at least not here anyway. The majority of Thailand is not on their laptop browsing through such sites, I seriously doubt it is very easy to even get internet access outside of the few large cities. Though I have never tried, who knows.

As far as the personal question. I have mixed emotions on the matter. I believe people should be permitted to say what they feel. But I really don't think that a picture of a 19 year old blonde (be creative regarding pornography) is any form of expressing a person's feelings.

As far a country blocking me from seeing it. Well I am grateful of the things they do allow me to see, look at it that way. The glass is never half empty in a manner of speaking.

But to the extent the country will not allow such displays inside my home, I would be elated if they did such a thing. I would not be in fear everytime my daughter says 'Ohhh look at the computer!'. Right now I am scared to death of them browsing by themselves, and jump everytime they say ewwww.

The software to allow parental control is even sold for $80 about 1 mile from where I live, to do the exact same thing these governments are doing.

Aljazeera..... I went there one time, when I was there I learned that the US news (CNN, Fox, MSNBC, and even the BBC) already censors the news. What I saw on Aljazeera was the bloodiest most graphic thing I have ever seen in my life. The image is BURNED into my memory, I can't forget the appearance, though I wish I could. It was an image the news spoke of and said was too graphic for words, my curiousity was piqued. To be sure that nobody else sees such images I would say no problem ban them all day long. But the other side of the coin I would be very Irate if TGN or BBC was not permitted in my home. I do feel that as a human I deserve an unbiased explanation of the world events. Aljazeera in my opinion is not an unbiased source.

No problem living in Thailand....
I was not comparing my thoughts to you or any other person living in Thailand. It was a manner of speech. What I did mean was, if people reply saying that this is simply the worst thing that the government could do, then I will be just fine. It was sarcasm in regards to people taking serious offense to the censorship.

I am sorry if I offended on this topic. I believe in free speech yes, but I also believe in the concept of maintaining national security, and even a national set of moral values. As mentioned above I think the area is grey, and not a black and white issue as it should be. I think that eventually the government will announce it's guidelines, and everyone will understand what is to be expected. Until then I guess only put onto the internet what you would allow your children to take off the internet.

Humbly,
Stack

[opelayday]

Quote[/b] ]Do you all really need these porn sites?

Of course not, and it's ridiculous to suggest so. I also never feel the need for any type of anonymous proxy (the ones I cited were found by typing "free proxy server" into Google) , and to suggest that I'm writing this post because the censorship is interfering with my daily life is completely missing the point to be honest. If you read my post I said I never came across any banned sites during normal daily life, but just having come across the article I wanted to see what type of sites were banned. I could tell the majority were pornographic as one of police sites provides a breakdown by percentage of the types of sites banned, that's all, I never went to any myself.

As the general impression of Thailand is that it is a free speech society (with the exception of the Monarchy, which I fully respect and understand) , but some of the acitivites going on such as censoring poliitcal sites and those 'threating national security' are not that consistent with this.

I'm surprised at your attitute to be honest Stacker, as I thought most Americans were staunch defenders of free speech and the "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it" principle. Is this not the case for you ? Do you agree with the Chinese government's filtering of any sites critical to it too ? Would your attitude be the same if the US government blocked access to say, aljazeera.net, and similar sites ? I'd be interested in Seeker's take on this as I know he's strongly in favour of free speech from some of his posts before.

Quote[/b] ] I would have no problem living in Thailand either

Jeez, I never said I had any problems living in Thailand, I was just surprised by the issue as I'd only just discovered and wondered about other people's experiences. The fact that I myself don't acess censored materials or do anything that would cause trouble to the authorities doesn't mean I agree with the censorship as a principle.

Quote[/b] ]About 2,660 web sites have been blocked for "Threatening National Security". The question is, what are the guidelines for banning the web sites in this category? It wasn't that long ago that two journalists were kicked out of the country for saying the wrong thing.

I entirely agree, this seems to be the most troubling thing. Without knowing what that means, and with a few high profile victims, it forces everyone into self-censorship and freedom of speech is limited - to what extent, nobody really knows.

Quote[/b] ]BTW, we did a bit of censorship on your post.

Fair enough, perhaps this is too much a sensitive topic for those of us in Thialand to discuss here.

I'm half tempted just to delete this entire topic myself in case it causes problems for me and/or this board. If you want to do that Sawatdee then I wouldn't object.

[Zdmlscid]

Great topic, Mike!

I was thinking of starting a similar conversation a while ago, when I was looking for the above-mentioned anonymous proxies (for email encryption). I was baffled when I got the "blocked" screen, but eventually got around it by finding a server that was not blocked. Back then, I took a screenshot of the blocked message with this conversation in mind. I mean, how the helll is an email-encryption program a threat to national security? What happened with the concept of privacy? I'm not too keen on the idea of anyone snooping into my private stuff here, however insignificant it may be to others.

Quote[/b] ]I'd be interested in Seeker's take on this as I know he's strongly in favour of free speech from some of his posts before.

Lol, yeah. Considering the communist repression I went through during my childhood, I am very much for freedom of expression, and Thailand may not be the most ideal place for that either.

One thing that irritates me is that the extent of reverence to Thai monarchy goes on the expense of historical correctness. This hinders me when I study Thai history, and I value the few books that leave out the BS and really tell like it was. Unfortunately, such books are difficult to get here, because many of them are banned too. As much as I'd love to discuss this in detail, I can't get any more specific than that, or the site may become inaccessible.

Sometimes I think of making an anonymous free site (geocities, angelfire, etc.) so I could tell you guys some really interesting stories - but life has too many problems now, can't afford the risks of adding more.

Quote[/b] ]Do I need to say what may happen to you and your family if you step on too many toes?

Sad, isn't it? Read and heard about people who got the rough treatment after speaking things too loud. Like Mike said, the extent of repression may similar to that of China, but all this goes on unconspicuously, so it appears less, if at all.

I too, am concerned about the slippery slope of Thai censorship, and what it may lead to in the future. It gives Thailand a third-world-country mentality found only in a few other aspects of life here.

[7kitthuptarill]

Ohh I meant nothing critical towards the government in this aspect. I strongly commend them on the move. Though others who read this may disagree, certainly the majority from the USA disagree with me as well, as this concept is the very foundation of our own constitution. I would be the outcast for my feelings on the matter of censorship.

Yes I do speak out openly in many aspects, I try not to critisize the government, I am quite fond of the actual 'shell' that exsists. I do try to limit my remarks to those who are in power, more specifically to those who are in power and abuse it in various ways. Or use their power to mask a personal agenda.

As I am posting on the blogs though, I will keep in mind the idea of not getting too specific with names or anything. I wouldn't want all our friends in Thailand to not have access to the website.

Ohhh Sawatdee, you don't know me
Seriously though, in everyday life I am quite quiet, no opinions mentions aloud, and very mild-mannered. You all have seen my viewpoints regarding the war in Iraq, the USA election of 2004, gun control, prostitution and even religion. But you know the people I see on a daily basis at work and so on, do not even know how I feel on such issues. I keep my opinions to myself throughout my life. The internet is where I try to vent my frustrations, not to my boss or co-workers that could get me into trouble.

[opelayday]

Quote[/b] (sawatdee @ Jan. 28 2005,03:40)]The question is, what are the guidelines for banning the web sites in this category? It wasn't that long ago that two journalists were kicked out of the country for saying the wrong thing.

There's more detail on this here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1853329.stm . I actually read the article in question, and in my opinion it showed no disrespect to the monarchy at all but was somewhat critical of Thaksin.

[opelayday]

Sorry Stacker, I didn't mean my post to come off as a flame, I was just irritated at the assertion from your post that I was worried about growing internet censorship because it meant access to fewer porn sites! Which wasn't what I'd meant at all, it's not that I had any special interest in viewing any of the banned sites, it's the gradual erosion of freedom that I'd be concerned about : e.g. first porn sites > gambling sites > poliitcal extremist sites > political oppenent sites > dissenting voices . It's easy to see how freedom can be eroded especially if it's done in a covert way. Already journalists are limited in what they can say about the present government without feeling intimidated, and is that really healthy for democracy?

Sure Stacker, I know there is a lot of material on the internet that is unsuitable for young children, and I too would be very wary of letting my children (if I had any!) have unsupervised access to the internet. But does that really mean the government should ban all material not suitable for children ?

Quote[/b] ]The software to allow parental control is even sold for $80 about 1 mile from where I live, to do the exact same thing these governments are doing.

Yep but then buying that would be responsibile parenting, it's a huge difference between that and the government making the whole society child-safe. If the government made everything child-safe, then no movies would ever have any swearing or violence in. Surely the best way to go is the present system, where responsbile parents choose what their children can see and not see, while adults can see things that aren't necessarily child-safe if they want to.

By the way, the list showing percentage of blocked sites is http://cyber.police.go.th/webreport/report/sum.php

[Anteneprorid]

Quote[/b] (sawatdee @ Jan. 28 2005,09:40)]On our web sites, we maintain self-censorship in order to survive. That includes what other people say or what pictures they post on our forums. Life is too short.

IMHO, sometimes self-censored is important. We have often seen the extreme opposite case where some people do not have any sense (or they don't care) that while practising their rights to speak up or criticise, they are actually intruding into the rights and freedom/privacy of others. In order to have complete freedom, everyone needs to have self-discipline (which is sadly lacking in some individuals). Freedom without Self-Discipline leads to Anarchy.

In the yeats before, the amount of censorship in my country is very high, but that has been very much relaxed over the years as the nation matures. We are after a very young nation despite our economic progress. As we mature, the censorship is gradually being relaxed. Nowadays our citizens are actually enouraged to speak up, even if it means criticizing our government, but old habits die hard. Most are still afraid. I have learnt that as long as one is constructive and does not have any ulterior motive other than the desire to improve my own country, criticizing my own government is allowed, if not actually encouraged. Interesting the current generation of government is much more open-minded, and they even tolerance non-constructive views as long as they are satisfied it is not an atttempt to stir up any racial or religious disharmony (for example).

Hopefully over time, Thailand will see the same thing. Further, Internet access is still not pervasive there, unlike in Singapore where almost every home can have access to broadband (at reasonable cost) if they so desire. I wish the situation is better in Bangkok and I can have broadband in the condo/apartment I chose to stay in. Seems that not all offers that capability and even getting fixed line may not be that easy due to lack of availability (at least that was the situation in Chinagrai, as told to me by TOT)

[Zdmlscid]

Quote[/b] ]Until then I guess only put onto the internet what you would allow your children to take off the internet.

Hmmm... Stacker, no offense, but that would turn the Internet into a cyber-Disneyland. There are things that children are not able to handle due to their young age and inexperience, but are perfectly suitable for adults with a strong moral compass.

Quote[/b] ]I believe in free speech yes, but I also believe in the concept of maintaining national security, and even a national set of moral values.

I feel the same way too. Freedom of speech shouldn't turn one's country into a free-for-all anarchic chaos. However, the set of moral values should not be national, IMO. Not even limited to a specific religion. But just select the very few values that are the root of humaneness, and thus reach beyond borders and doctrines. Utopia, I know.