Wallenda Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 That they arrested Khun JJ does not indicate the story was true, they got to do something to show awareness. From what I read, JJ is being held for pulling out the gun. So, he didn't? Or the director told him to do that, but now he's decided to take the fall for it and not rat the director out. Anyway, I saw the show and read the same article you guys did, came away with exactly the opposite impression. Of course the presence of the cameras had some effect on the situation, mainly (I'd expect) preventing a physical fight from breaking out, which probly would've happened had they not been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gadfly Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 This reminds me of the thread about the airport scams, and the long debate about whether the lady did or did not put the wallet in her bag. Lot's of interesting points made, but none of it was dispositive and it all diverted attention from a much bigger problem. The forest seems to get missed for the trees when we discuss these sorts of "events" here. I think we are going to see more critical reporting of Thailand going forward. Some extraordinary things have happened here over the past year or so. This not only generates interest in stories about Thailand, but also adds credibility to negative stories. I see this as largely a good thing, since some issues that were swept under the carpet will get more attention. Sure you will see some sensationalism in some of the reports (that is to be expected), but I see that as trivial and this board itself shows the self-correcting nature of the internet, so overall this is a positive. What I find much more interesting is the tourism industry's and the government's thus far ham fisted efforts to report on any news they don't like. But this can and probably will change. Indeed, I think we are starting to see some changes at the very top, but whether it will filter down remains to be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USVirgin Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 Given your observations about the board consensus on various events, ain't it ironic that this motley crew of expats and non-quality tourists are such loyal TAT apologists? Edit: I shouldn't have used the word 'consensus'. Debate would be the proper word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 I based my fake comment on this link posted by US Virgin above... http://phuketwan.com/tourism/big-trouble-inside-jet-ski-scandal-11555/ Looks like you missed this part from this piece you linked to that's written by the director: "If anyone is still of the opinion that the scene with JJ is faked then I will today provide links to the raw' date=' uncut footage from the events of that day and our full interviews with JJ - before and after." [/quote'] No I read the article pretty carefully. I think basically your idea of fake is different from mine. I've been following the story on other message boards. Here's a piece of footage that wasn't included. It looks more spontaneous than the earlier stuff but it still suggests a set-up to me. It isn't clear if the marine damaged the jetski or not and the viewer is lead to believe he is watching an extortion attempt. At the very least JJ was tricked into making a fool of himself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYdILnnSfWM&feature=player_embedded This just in. The whole thing could become an international incident... http://www.andrew-drummond.com/2009/09/12/british-royal-marine-will-go-to-war-over-thai-jet-ski-incident/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 I guess I'm not understanding what you mean exactly by 'faked' then. Looking at this video you just linked to, it doesn't look like anyone in it is faking anything. What do you think is fake in it? Someone said JJ got tricked into making a fool of himself. What I read was that JJ phoned up the director and asked him to come over to observe an incident where there was damage to a jetski. Later JJ decided to go get his gun. Should JJ be the one held responsible for his going and getting his gun? Someone else here was trying to explain that one away by saying it was a BB gun -- well, 1. it doesn't look like a fake gun, and 2. why try so hard to excuse someone brandishing a gun? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 OK then. In your opinion what appeared on the Bravo TV show was totally spontaneous impartial journalism. I say it was fake by which I mean it all happened for the benefit of the camera. Can we just leave it at that? Reality TV is something of a new phenomenon and I think the jury is still out on the ethics of it. JJ was a damn fool to produce the gun but the editor left it in. I'm not excusing anybody just trying to understand what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalo_bill Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 It might all have happened as the video says but the video as such I am sure is made up . In any case it might help to spread the news that Siam has become a heaven for tourist scams and unless there is international pressure on the local authorities this will never change . What you have now in Thailand is worse than the Costa Brava at peak times . ( Nok never ask money , she different ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 Right. The whole point of the exercise is to show tourists getting into trouble in Thailand (and make a bit of money off it). Hopefully it will result in some positive changes but I doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted September 13, 2009 Report Share Posted September 13, 2009 The pressure will only be when the $$$ disappear, then the gov and the businesses will get things fixed. Until this happens, business as usual...IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wallenda Posted September 14, 2009 Report Share Posted September 14, 2009 OK then. In your opinion what appeared on the Bravo TV show was totally spontaneous impartial journalism. I say it was fake by which I mean it all happened for the benefit of the camera. Can we just leave it at that? Reality TV is something of a new phenomenon and I think the jury is still out on the ethics of it. JJ was a damn fool to produce the gun but the editor left it in. I'm not excusing anybody just trying to understand what happened. If we're talking about the camera's having an effect on how things play out, that it's different than it would if it wasn't there, OK. I just dont' think 'fake' is a good way to describe it though because someone who just looks at you saying "it's fake", they immediately think you mean that everyone was paid to pretend to do waht they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.