MEDIA LIES ARE DAMAGING THAILAND
Alan Morison of PhuketWan has launched a stinging attack on the media for spreading the 'dangerous Thailand' myth.
A story published online by The Times based on a report from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) claims: "British tourists are more likely to be killed in Thailand than any other destination .. " comes under fire because it's based on outdated information. The story also incorrectly states that "The majority of 324 reported hospitalisations in Thailand were due to motorbike accidents ..". There is absolutely no mention of this in the FCO report, and Alan says it's based on information from last year.
It's fair to say that the recent FCO report, which I wrote about on Tuesday, does indicate that more British citizens die in Thailand proportionately than anywhere else. It certainly does not use words like "deadliest" and "killed" that appear in The Times article.
Alan cites a quote from Andrew Biggs that was published in The Bangkok Post recently. He said: "We get wild rumors on the internet dressed up in coats of serious journalism telling us how dangerous Thailand is for tourists."
I couldn't agree more. I've written much about the misleading image of Thailand that is so often portrayed in the overseas media. Of course the events of the last few years haven't helped and have probably contributed to the negative image in the minds of many people, however that's absolutely no excuse for publishing wholly incorrect information that paints an entirely misleading picture.
7 comments:
I believe this is a worldwide ethical issue. I often see many stories in the US printed media ranting about how dangerous Mexico and some other nemesis countries are. (Well..we are all know how good the US media is). :-/
It may be seen ethically correct for the media to be precautious and try to warn the public. But, often time, the media takes it way too seriously. As a result, any name-mentioned countries could have been impacted.
However, the media should not hold a sole responsibility though, since its purpose is to serve the public. And guess what the public is usually attracted to? Casualty and Sensation!
"British tourists are more likely to be killed in Thailand than any other destination .. "
It was not that long ago that Australia had a similar distinction. As with all reporting it is open to just about any interpretation you could wish to make.
Greedy politicians and their insane antics are damaging Thailand.
Airport closures?
Riots in Bangkok?
Increase in crime?
Unresolved tourist murders/deaths?
Unregulated tourist boats sinking?
One Two Go airlines?
Thailand as a country is causing most of the bad publicity itself.
@ Khun Phisut. Yes, I agree. Bad news always sells. Often the real facts behind a story are far less exciting.
@ Lloyd. For sure, you can take any report and create a dozen different stories. What's happening in the case of The Times' story is they've used incorrect information and claimed something as fact when it plainly is not.
@ James. Thailand's image in the global media has been battered as a result of what's been happening over the past few years. That's true. But when things are reported which are misleading or simply untrue something should be said.
The Times report seems fine to me, there's nothing sensational or misleading about it. Thailand is a very dangerous country to be in, that's borne out in the figures.
That the figures come from last year is no surprise, you can't publish figures for this year until it's over.
If you want to talk about inflammatory reporting, what about your headline "Media Lies are Damaging Thailand"?
Dan, thanks for commenting.
There are many things wrong with the story in The Times, as you will see if you have also viewed the original information that was published by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
For starters the story uses figures that were not released by the FCO on Tuesday, which were figures related to the period from 1/4/08 - 31/3/09. The article uses figures from a previous report.
The article also wrongly says Brits are more likely to be "killed" in Thailand than anywhere else. The report only mentions deaths, and I would suspect the vast majority of these are from natural courses. I am seeking clarification on this from the FCO.
You say that Thailand is a dangerous country to be in? Based on ... ? Because proportionately more British citizens die here it doesn't necessarily mean it's dangerous. I am only speculating, but I suspect the reason why more people die here has a lot to do with the significant number of elderly people in the Kingdom.
The Times' story makes mentions of most deaths being from motorbike accidents. There is no mention of this in the FCO report, even though the Times story directly quotes from it - or at least gives the impression that it does.
Ultimately, the facts contained in this story are not a true reflection of the facts provided in the report it claims to cite from.
You will know, if you're a regular, that I have highlighted many examples in the past where Thailand has been the subject of misleading and, in some cases, false reporting in the overseas media. There's an example today where The Economist says that ".. Bangkok has been brought to its knees .." in the last few months as a result of the Songkran clashes. That's news to me.
In this instance I do not agree with your assertion that there's nothing wrong with the story in The Times, and I stand by what I wrote. I also stand by the email I sent to The Times asking for a correction or clarification to their story.
Several posters have left comments which liken the "dangerous Thailand" perception to the recents LM incidents.
Breaking laws, whether you agree with them or not, is dangerous in any country. These comments do not relate in any way to the original topic of my post.
I will write something on the LM issues over the weekend, and perhaps those commenter \s may wish to leave further comments at that time.
Post a Comment