User talk:Amx002/Sandbox

Pawyi Lee's comments

Thank you for your invitation. I will limit myself to grammar, but even that will be a huge task. As an example of how huge, consider just one word: "medias'. "Media" in this context is a mass-noun that may be singular or plural, but never "midias." The media, or the news media, can mean television, radio, newspapers and magazines. The Media can also mean the people who write for and work in the media, called journalists, reporters, and even bloggers such as Jotman, who are increasingly respected for impartial reporting. Reporters can cover all of these terms, but only corrects the grammar without clearing up confusion as to who they are. Pawyilee (talk) 10:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your advice. I appreciate having more. As show in sandbox, my english skill is intermidate level. About word 'medias', I don't know that it can be used as plural. At the same time, i thought it's correct as Thai public company also using 'medias'. Media of Medias Public Company Limited.Amx002 (talk) 19:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More people speak (or use) English as a 2nd language than speak it as a mother tongue. Just as American usage has imposed its on "standard" on the Queen's English, so will the Thai and others impose their own. Thus, "Medias" would be correct in some usages, but not in others. See this report on "Grammar vandals", and be warned that I am the same. Pawyilee (talk) 14:08, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are Manager and ASTV PAD's propaganda?

First paragraph, is this what you meant?

The Manager Daily newspaper was founded by media-mogul Sondhi Limthongkul. Using Manager Daily in the propaganda model mode, Sondhi attempts to destroy his opposition. After relationships between Sondhi and Thaksin deteriorated, Sondhi used Manager Daily to attack Thaksin and his government. Responding to continuous attacks from Manager Daily, Thaksin sued Sondhi and Manager Daily for THB 500 million on 11 October 2005.[5] Sondhi then accused Thaksin of intimidating Thai mass media, thus inducing Thai media to attack Thaksin in perceived self-defense. This escalated to the extent that government felt intimidated from using the law to counter media disinformation tactics. Instead. Thaksin and his party began to invest in the mass media business, themselves. (One consequence was Today's Truth (ความจริงวันนี้ Kwam Jing Wan Nee), and another, Yam Fao Paendin, broadcast on NBT.)
Using the charge of "media intimidation" as a shield, many media slant news to their own ends with false information about government, which has gained PAD a great many supporters. Manager Daily continuous to use these "propaganda model" tactics.

Remember, Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. Also consider that the media savvy [those knowing how such thing work in real life] consider such tactics "par for the course" [from golf, meaning an average score.] Pawyilee (talk) 04:16, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for refine paragraph. The reason why I wrote about PTT case because of Verifiability. Most newspapers in Thailand have websites. If someone want to dig for an information, verifiable is easily thing. There are a lot of cases, PTT just one of many cases. Facts are easy to forget, only emotions remain. In science, to prove something right, have to try prove it wrong. You could try it. Why government chose to start Today's Truth instead of perform legal action against Manager?

P.S. One of my acquaintance working for newspaper, reporting rumors are what they called par. If rumors are truth, they are ahead of other publisher. If not, it's rumors. Not to mention editors that got paid for writing somethings that cause convenient misunderstanding. Amx002 (talk) 18:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Facts

Here is a quote from FactCheck.org, which trys to hold US politicians to account for misinformation:

Facts are essential if we are to overcome our brain’s tendency to believe everything it hears. As a species, we’re still pretty new to that whole process. Aristotle invented logic just 2,500 years ago – a mere blink of the eye when compared with the 200,000 years we Homo sapiens relied on our brain’s reflex responses to avoid being eaten by lions. We still have a long way to go. Throw in a tsunami of ads and Internet bluster and the path gets even harder....

I mean to write more, but a storm has rolled in and I must disconnect my computer. Pawyilee (talk) 08:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.

—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X Big Lie. Pawyilee (talk) 15:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions of the rural poor have always been ignored

Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation, 10 September 2008 Article:

Two weeks after the anti-government People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD) occupied Government House and plunged the Kingdom into political crisis, the views of ordinary people - especially the rural poor - have been conspicuously absent from media reports. They have largely not been heard from in any substantial way.

There's no excuse for the media not to rectify the situation, unless they stop calling themselves the "mass media". At present, they are like Bangkok's mass-transit Skytrain and subway systems: calling themselves "mass" but actually more for the middle class, as the rest cannot afford the tickets.

Pawyilee (talk) 13:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People's Alliance for a Special Thai Example of Democracy--PASTED

Harrison George 12 September 2008 article:

The one thing they say about the People’s Alliance for Democracy is that their media campaign is brilliant.
Oh yeah?
For those of you who have neither the time nor stomach to trawl through the websites, I have selflessly and diligently stolen here a selection of comments on the PAD from foreign sources.
***Quotations from foreign sources omitted***
That is certainly a unique kind of democracy. So unique that I think the PAD deserves a name change to stop all this confusion about what ‘democracy’ means to them. How about the People’s Alliance for a Special Thai Example of Democracy? PASTED. I think that’s much clearer.

I am am not stealing from him, so go see for yourself what he has diligently stolen, from Al-Jazeera to the Wall Street Journal. Pawyilee (talk) 14:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]