Whilst not "gay" here's a good reminded to be careful what we say online about Thai businesses perhaps !

[Nirish guy]

Whilst not relating to anything 'gay" below is a story in todays press which serves as a good reminder to us all if we need it to be careful about what we say about Thai people or businesses online in terms of Thailands strict anti-defamation laws. Below is a story of an American leaving ( several) bad ( and possibly false or at least quite harsh) reviews of a hotel he stayed at in Koh Chang and how the hotel after asking him to desist simply pressed charges on him which resulted with him ending up in jail and massive legal problem ( and bill no doubt) now coming his way !


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-54335789

[Dodger]

Good reminder.

If they ever read what farang have been saying about Immigration over the years they'd need bigger jails.

[Nirish guy]

Absolutely ! :-)

Whilst the above is an interesting case ( and I've no doubt it was the yank who was in the wrong most likely from reading the detail about how he insisted on not paying 500 baht corkage charge for bringing his own wine into their restaurant etc ( and even his own friend apologised to the management for his behaviour it seems) the hotel may have shot themselves in the foot going for the nuclear option here it seems.

Both Trip advisor and Facebook pages have been inundated with people ( yanks) leaving (fake) bad reviews and other nasty comments ( so much so that trip advisor have withdrawn the comments section on their page re the hotel) so whilst the hotel may have gotten their revenge it may come at a higher price in terms of bad PR.

I'm also guessing the powers that be in the government tourism department wont be to well pleased at them either as they LAST THING Thailand tourism needs now is bad PR about Thai hotels being able to get Yanks jailed and left with massive legal bills for simply leaving a "bad review" about their Thai hotel !

I'm guessing this case will be quickly settled out of court if all parties are wise !

[Oliver2]

An English guy reporting the miserable working conditions which foreign workers endured in a canning factory was also victimised.

[Moses]

Thanks for drawing our attention to the news item on the BBC website, NIrish-guy. It’s a timely reminder for those members lucky enough to live in Thailand and for all of us who post on Sawatdee about Thailand’s strict anti-defamation laws. Sadly, it looks like Mr Wesley Barnes has found this out the hard way as, in addition to being sued by The Sea View Resort, it is reported that he has lost his job over the incident and has expressed worries that the publicity his case has generated would make it harder to find new employment.

To protect the Board and its members, the subject of libel, (https://www.thefreedictionary.com/libel) i.e. in law, defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures; anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents is covered in our rules at the fourth bullet point of rule 3.2.3, which I have copied below for the benefit of members:


3.2.3 There are some topics that may not be discussed and which may put the Board in jeopardy. These are:


Making defamatory/libellous statements about any person or organisation.

[arsenal]

So where do we stand with regards to restaurant reviews etc?

[Armando]

This has gone worldwide. The New York Times has a longish article about it.

No-one comes out of this with any credit. The Yank is a jerk. To walk into any hotel restaurant expecting to drink your own bottle of gin without a small corkage payment is the height of stupidity. What's 500 baht split amongst several mates? A reasonable discussion with the F&B manager might have had some merit but an all out argument in a public pace was nuts. Even one of his pals apologised for his behaviour. And then he was even let off the corkage charge.

Instead of thanking the hotel for not charging him a standard charge, the jerk then libeled the F&B manager and the hotel in public reviews. Considering he then flooded sites with reviews that were both libellous and racist, he deserved his fate.

He also makes the ridiculous assertion in that BBC article that "he hopes to resolve the case with the hotel directly." What is there to resolve? The hotel tried multiple times to contact him after the event without success. They even informed him in writing that if he continued to write false reviews they would have no alternative but to take action against him. He carried on his vendetta. So he's doubly a moron.

I have more sympathy with the hotel but in calling in the cops they've shot themselves in the foot. Seems tripadviser left up only one of his reviews. If a hotel cannot stand a negative review even if it is false the manager should not be in the business.

In the end it is Thailand that really suffers. Presumably the powers that be will instruct the cops to let the Yank's case drop. But in drawing world attention to the Defamation Law and how it can so easily be enacted, it may be some time before the negative PR ends. And all this at a time when the country is talking about opening up again for tourists!

[homeseeker]

Can add some more rules about Thailand as well:

i) Insult or argue with "the establishment" here in Thailand at your peril;

ii) there is no such principle as 'innocent until proven guilty'/ or trial by jury;

iii)Thailand is not a democracy/does not have free speech(as Westerners understand that idea)and is ruled by an elite including the military;

iv) it is not for foreigners ie aliens, to publicly comment or change how life and business operate in Thailand....

etc etc

Please feel free to add some more...if you dare!

[goji]

So where do we stand with regards to restaurant reviews etc?

1 From what I see, the gentleman concerned only got into this situation after being very unreasonable and writing more than one review. I would have thought there would be less risk for a single review.

2 I trust none of us use our full names for reviews on Google or Trip Advisor, so traceability would be difficult. I suppose reviews are traceable on Booking.com and Hotels.com. However, I continue to review hotels. Thankfully most hotels are reasonable, but occasionally a hotel deserves and gets a negative review from me.
If there's a problem in a hotel I visit frequently, I ask them to fix it and they usually do so.

[Armando]

1 From what I see, the gentleman concerned only got into this situation after being very unreasonable and writing more than one review. I would have thought there would be less risk for a single review.
He wrote reviews on several sites continually for several weeks. The 'offence' took place in June. The hotel offered to discuss the matter with him. He was informed that if he continued with his stupidity the hotel would have no alternative but to take further action. He did not respond. He has more than deserved his fate.

[Dodger]

The farang comes off as an asshole and got what he deserved.

As a side-note: 1% of the Thai population controls 60% of the wealth, and if a person (Thai or foreigner) openly voices their opinion about anyone (or any entity) in that 1%, they can be imprisoned (or worse) using the same law.

So this "libel" bullshit swings both ways.

[extronaut]

Apparently an American was temporarily jailed for a bad review of a hotel.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54335789

He now faces the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence.

Now admittedly, it sounds like the guy went a little hard on the hotel, publishing multiple negative reviews of the place, and accusing them of "modern day slavery".

But as the analysis further down the page points out, it really isn't hard for a Thai to make life extremely difficult for you using these laws. Thai courts are notoriously biased against foreigners too.

This is disturbing, because like all tourism economies, Thailand is full of rip offs. If they're going to make it complicated, even precarious, to warn other travelers online, I wonder if it's worth going. I wonder if it's right to go.

[Armando]

Apparently an American was temporarily jailed for a bad review of a hotel.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-54335789

He now faces the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence. .

Errr haven't you read the other posts on this thread? You are merely repeating what has already been discussed.

[Josan]

The Thaiger News reports that this man is wanted for a weapons charge in Missouri, USA

[dab69]

Penalties that severe should only be applied if the offender used the
word "whilst" in the review...

[Nirish guy]

Penalties that severe should only be applied if the offender used the
word "whilst" in the review...


Whilst not relating to anything 'gay" below is a story in todays press [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

And there only yesterday I was being touting as your friend........well now THAT didn't last long now did it eh !!! :-)

( ps for clarity in case just in case you're not aware...... Whilst, CONJUNCTION, Whilst means the same as the conjunction while. [mainly British, formal, or literary]. :-p

[dab69]

Not only did you add the required gay aspect of your post we all got a lesson in advanced poofery. God save the queen

[Nirish guy]

Not only did you add the required gay aspect of your post we all got a lesson in advanced poofery. God save the queen

You're most welcome., you can thank me later. ;-)

[dab69]

US man avoids jail in Thailand over bad resort review

https://news.yahoo.com/us-man-avoids-jail-thailand-024926487.html

Apparently they have settled for an apology.
And unlike some here will continue to refrain from using "whilst" REPEATEDLY in a single post.

[Nirish guy]

You do know that WHLST posting here about I'm going to carry on doing that now just ESPECIALLY to annoy you now dont you....... :-P

PS it's a WORD - you chose while, I choose whilst, they mean the same thing.....you've little to put your day in obvious if just silly things get to you !? :) and PPS - "I" didn't repeat the word, if you're referring to the above you can thank the collins dictionary for that one as that was a cut and paste from their own definition just........so WHILST I understand how you may have come to that conclusion - you're wrong ! :-p

[gerefan2]

US man avoids jail in Thailand over bad resort review

https://news.yahoo.com/us-man-avoids-jail-thailand-024926487.html

Apparently they have settled for an apology.
.

Haha I would say they received more than an apology!

From the article ....

“ Police said Mr Barnes and the resort had managed to reach an agreement, which INCLUDED an apology to the hotel” and...
“ both parties had met over a mediation session OVERSEEN by police.”

They all lived happily ever after, Thai style!

[Nirish guy]

https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/1998927/american-to-say-sorry-for-bad-reviews

The Bangkok Post article above expands on the agreement reached saying that it included the following :

"In the four-point agreement, Mr Barnes would issue a formal and sincere apology to the hotel and its staff and have it published in all media outlets that reported the dispute.

He will also send a separate apology to the Trat provincial tourism office for causing negative effects on the province's tourism sector and inform the American embassy of the facts surrounding the disputeMr Barnes would also contact TripAdvisor to explain why he faced the defamation complaint over his negative reviews and ask the website to remove the "Red Badge" from the hotel review page.

He was expected to fulfil the agreement by Oct 30, after which the hotel would withdraw the defamation complaint against him.

Before the meeting, Tinnapat Meephetatthamongkol, the hotel's lawyer, said the hotel was wiling to settle the dispute with Mr Barnes and all he needed to do was to show sincerity, take responsibility for his actions and be prepared to set things right."

So the guy ( or his solicitor / PR advisor if he had one) has some work to do in approaching all of the various people and businesses concerned to offer his sincere apology and explanation of his actions.

As to whether or not any other "arrangement" was reached I guess we'll never know, but if the above IS it then the guy should consider that he walked away from this lightly compared to how things could have ended for him ! I'm betting he was just lucky that the world is where it is right now and the Thai Government had probably quietly suggested to the business concerned to drop this at the earliest point possible once their "face" had been seen to be restored sufficiently perhaps.