Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

xX.TROPA.Xx · Post by **xX.TROPA.Xx** » Sun May 02, 2021 1:16 pm

Matty9999 wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 8:44 am
Anchor Moy wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 11:41 pm
nerdlinger wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 10:42 pm I have no intention of getting myself actively involved with Khmer politics, but at the same time I have read various stories of people being arrested for posting stuff online and I'm curious about what's safe and what isn't.

For example is it as bad as China where the government have a blatant revisionist history and send people who tweet about the Tiananmen Square massacre or Taiwan's status off for "re-education" or mark them down on their "social credit" score? Or do they only give you grief in the KoW if you look like you're a serious political agitator with an active follower base? Would any of us be in danger of being hauled off if there was a casual thread on CEO about HE's involvement in the Khmer Rouge, in a way that deviated from the party line?
In a short answer, assume that all that you write on the open forum or on social media (esp FB), will be read by someone. Whether they will care or do anything is another matter. A lot of the problem can be a question of timing. The 'line' can be redrawn daily.

At one stage, there was an official govt line which was that nobody was escaping from quarantine, and any reports to the contrary were deemed to be undermining the official line. There were veiled threats to anyone posting this information on social media. But once it became obvious that some people were breaking lockdown and escaping quarantine, the authorities had to let that go, because the horse had already escaped the stable, and it was impossible to pass off as fake news.
One day's fake news is the next day's breaking news. Impossible to know really. But if the govt say "something" (whatever), then this is the official truth in the moment, so don't come out on CEO and say it's not true. Sad to say, but we need to self-censor. Think about how you could rephrase your disbelief, as a question for example, and not a statement. Be creative.
I have a Youtube channel that some people watch, not many, but still you never know. I had a video up describing some of my thoughts on how the government was handling CV in Cambodia, mostly just facts but also i didn't want it to come off as criticism, so I hid the video. I may very well repost it once I leave the country. Youtube doesn't really tell you who is watching the video so it could be 50 American tourists or 50 government officials who are following my every move.

if you're in Cambodia i would suggest not posting anything critical of the government

xX.TROPA.Xx · Post by **xX.TROPA.Xx** » Sun May 02, 2021 1:18 pm

Spigzy · Post by **Spigzy** » Sun May 02, 2021 1:54 pm

To me it is very simple - any mention of them, international branch of, or HE & associates is quite simply a no-no.

What I've never seen from the muppets on the other side of the political or journalistic spectrum is controlled positive opinion or reporting where the writer manages to hold their tongue. Simple example on say deforestation; every single article revolves around what they or HE have done wrong, why they're so bad, why this, why that, etc, with a good deal of finger pointing. What somebody like the Rainman or others should have come out with is simply "If it were my decision, I would implement xyz" END. Emphasis on the END. Because Rainman has said some things that are positive (I can't think of any top of head, but I'm sure he has), but he always ends it with "unlike the corrupt them/HE!!!". Like the person who has to have the last word in an argument, it is beyond childish & ends them all up in defamation suits, etc.

Same goes for the journalists reporting generally - if there's something about road traffic safety for instance; it is all "they haven't got a clue, they haven't put xyz in place, and the police are all corrupt, so it'll never change". There always has to be some opinion about why the current competent authorities are not so competent instead of acknowledging it isn't perfect, but there are xyz things that can be done to improve the situation.

To be fair I have the same problem with Western Media also, so much opinion & not so much on facts any longer. The only paper I would read back in the UK became the FT, not because I was a banker, but because it was the only one that would report facts, with clearly atrributable quotes. It was laid out in a "A said this, B said that, here are the only facts/stats we have to hand to support either argument; make your own mind up you adult you!".

Cambodia needs something like that, nobody can ever argue with reporting facts or quotes, although I'd probably skip the latter. Opinion pieces would be fine if they are laid out in a positive manner. For example, "I think there should be an digital identity project in the country that allows all banks and telcos to get a full KYC record from a central source instead of them all doing their own thing". At no point does it point a finger that government isn't doing it, or thinking about it, no criticism - just a simple, "wouldn't it be great if..." opinion. Censor that.

Post by **Clutch Cargo** » Sun May 02, 2021 4:08 pm

Nobody wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 1:11 pm
blueman.cambodia wrote: ↑Sat May 01, 2021 11:15 pm Others will echo the same as me. In this country there is no legislated or constitutional freedom of speech. If your voiced opinion agrees with the government, you can speak as loud and as frequently as you like. However, if your opinion is opposed to the Government, the loosely interpreted laws can send you to prison. The lèse-majesté law that came in 2018 makes it a crime to embarrass the King. So being so loose, if you embarrass the Prime Minister, that in turn can mean you are embarrassing the King. If you criticize a section of government, in turn that can also embarrass the King. There are many examples out there of people who found how loose the lèse-majesté law is......
I won't say it, but most in Cambodia know the facts or the rumors...... however, one 17 year old lad in Cambodia got sentenced to two years in prison for questioning the Kings sexuality.
You can read of government opponents disappearing.....
Just adding this in an edit..... a UK guy had a hotel resturant in Phnom Penh back around 2017. He criticized the government on his facebook page. He travelled back to UK for a break and when trying to come back to Cambodia, found his visa cancelled.

I will leave it there. There is no freedom of speech or allowance of free thought in this country.

I can't see what you have to complain about, Clutch has not banned you from voicing your opinion yet.

Crikey! Nine posts and you're baiting/trolling a mod..

Do you live in Cambodia?

If you do and want to voice your opinion/make allegations about the gov't on CEO which happen to be critical, then, you're opening yourself up to the risk of having a knock on your door by an unexpected guest.. Whatever the correctness of the opinion/allegation is immaterial in my view. The fact is, expats are guests here and imo have to be attuned to and abide by the local conditions here around speech et al, or else..

If you don't live here, then spare a thought for fellow CEO members who do and refrain from doing same because if CEO is targeted, there could be consequences.

Good topic this and timely with the current situation.

As others have already said, I would also urge members to be very careful what they post on these issues and the associated language they use. The mods will step in with posts that go over the top and cross the line if need be but obviously we would prefer not to have to do that. To CEO members who may claim censorship, I hope you recognise and understand the local conditions here and the risks involved at the present and the need for being careful.

xX.TROPA.Xx · Post by **xX.TROPA.Xx** » Sun May 02, 2021 5:01 pm

if you watch the video they talk to a young Cambodian man that did 18 months in jail for a facebook post I think that pretty much answers your question.

Phnom Poon · Post by **Phnom Poon** » Sun May 02, 2021 5:33 pm

Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 1:54 pm Same goes for the journalists reporting generally - if there's something about road traffic safety for instance; it is all "they haven't got a clue, they haven't put xyz in place, and the police are all corrupt, so it'll never change". There always has to be some opinion about why the current competent authorities are not so competent instead of acknowledging it isn't perfect, but there are xyz things that can be done to improve the situation.

i guess that's why they're called reporters
not management consultants

to be fair, reporters often put up their ideas of what should be done
but it's moot, because it is not what is being done

Artisan · Post by **Artisan** » Sun May 02, 2021 5:48 pm

Roughly 5 years ago...

post138815.html#p138815

One might be working here, have valid visa and work permit and know how to speak Khmer but don't forget you are still a guest here.

xandreu · Post by **xandreu** » Sun May 02, 2021 6:20 pm

It's not so much about being a guest here. The point is that by being guests, we are no different to the local natives. Being a guest gives us no special rights nor privilege over anyone else. Whatever standards, laws or etiquette are in place in terms of voicing political opinion here, apply equally to everyone. Regardless of our passports or residential status.

xX.TROPA.Xx · Post by **xX.TROPA.Xx** » Sun May 02, 2021 6:27 pm

xandreu wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 6:20 pm It's not so much about being a guest here. The point is that by being guests, we are no different to the local natives. Being a guest gives us no special rights nor privilege over anyone else. Whatever standards, laws or etiquette are in place in terms of voicing political opinion here, apply equally to everyone. Regardless of our passports or residential status.

So in other words keep your head down and stfu.

Spigzy · Post by **Spigzy** » Sun May 02, 2021 6:54 pm

Phnom Poon wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 5:33 pm
Spigzy wrote: ↑Sun May 02, 2021 1:54 pm Same goes for the journalists reporting generally - if there's something about road traffic safety for instance; it is all "they haven't got a clue, they haven't put xyz in place, and the police are all corrupt, so it'll never change". There always has to be some opinion about why the current competent authorities are not so competent instead of acknowledging it isn't perfect, but there are xyz things that can be done to improve the situation.
i guess that's why they're called reporters
not management consultants

to be fair, reporters often put up their ideas of what should be done
but it's moot, because it is not what is being done

That's part of the problem though, everyone has an opinion - reporting should be of facts and quotes, the latter being quite dangerous here, but possible if done tactfully. Don't put a quote & then directly call the person quoted a liar for backpeddling on an earlier promise. You can put an old quote, and a new quote side by side & leave the reader to discern that the person is a liar. It isn't management consulting, it's just plain journalism.

Every newspaper has an "opinion" column, but that's something that doesn't really work here. But if you simply reported the number of road traffic deaths, stats on fines, helmet use & then lob a comparison with another country, you can get the message across - with facts - without calling the competent authorities incompetent directly (and thus be brought to court, etc.)

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but reporting is of facts, stats & quotes - leave the opinion pieces to those who want to 'cross the line' a la Rainman & chums. I think it's dangerous for journos here to push the envelope like is possible in a western nation; but you'd be hard pushed to 'cross any government line' by simply reporting verifiable facts at face value; even if your facts are 100% correct, but you then go on for one little "and it's all HE's fault!", you're begging for trouble.

Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Re: Where does the govt draw the line on speech?

Who is online

Register/Login to CEO with your Social Media Account: