Summary
According to
“Chinese users flock to Clubhouse amid soaring popularity” by Mary-Ann Russon (2021), although Chinese people in the mainland are prohibited from discussing controversial topics which are censored by the Chinese government, they can freely do so by using Clubhouse. The mobile application allows thousands of Chinese users of iphone to easily bypass China’s Great Firewall to arrange private audio chatrooms. As the app has been gaining popularity and many of the Chinese users started sharing what they have seen in the chartrooms on Twitter, it is likely that the Chinese government will limit access to Clubhouse in the future. Prior to its popularity among Chinese people, Clubhouse was launched in May 2020 and has been being used by many tech leaders in Silicon Valley and US celebrities for free of charge. However, the founders of Clubhouse has a plan for making money from the app.
______________________
Response
When I saw the news article, it reminded me of freedom of speech. I think everyone has the right to express their opinions. However, I am a bit confused about the principle in some situations. For example, I was taught at school to be careful of what I said to other people, as that was considered as politeness. At school I learn many Thai proverbs about speaking and talking. Thai proverb such as ‘Kwan Par Sak’ helps me to avoid saying something bluntly, because that can hurt my audiences’ feelings, or ‘Bpaak Bpraa-săi Nám-jai Chuêrd-kor’ helps me be sceptical about what people say to me, as they might not be honest and want to manipulate me. I think it is difficult to say or communicate something to other people, as there might be negative consequences caused by our words. Before reading this news article, I saw many news articles about censorship in China. As the advancement of information technology is increasing in the country, the government is trying to block the activities of its citizens. I remembered news that reported about using facial recognition to scan its citizens in the public areas. I don’t like it. I mean I would be unhappy if the Thai government does the same as the Chinese government does in China. I think it a bit violates my privacy. I also recalled news that reported about the social credit score system in China. The government is monitoring all of the transactions of its citizens’ spending. In other words, they keep records of what each individual has bought so far and then they measure the credibility of those individuals by the behaviour on buying. For example, if a man has been buying a lot of video games, he would get a low credit score as his behaviour seems to be irresponsible. In contrast, if that man has been buying a lot of drypers, he would get a high credit score as his pattern of buying shows that he is responsible. I hope Thai government won’t do the same thing in Thailand.
______________________
Question
Do you think that people can express or speak freely?
______________________
Reference
Although I am most interested in Emma's thoughtful question, especially for an ambiguity in it, I also like her title.
ReplyDeleteGossip is an important aspect of being human, and Emma's title reminded me of this. My first idea was that I don't gossip, but of course, I was wrong. I do gossip. I gossip when I meet my friends in AUA's teachers' lounge at Rajadamri - I've now done that exactly twice in the past 11 months, since the branch reopened and I again have a face-to-face, or at least mask-to-mask, class twice a week. But I also gossip on Messenger, FB, and Line. As Emma's summary and response reminded me, just because it's done digitally does not mean that gossip is not gossip.
I wonder, could any human being or group of humans not gossip? And is gossip necessarily a bad thing? Should we try not to do it?
And then there is the more interesting set of questions that Emma's actual question raises. But your turn first.
I agree with your thoughts of trying to avoid saying things that hurt others, Emma. In the past, I was a person, who spoke frankly and I automatically talked when everything just came to my mind. At that time, I faced a lot of problems about my blunt speeches as many people blamed me that I really hurt their feelings. However, just a few people accepted me and became our close friends.
ReplyDeleteAfter realizing about consequences of my talks, I rarely talk to people as I did not want to feel guilty for hurting my others' feeling although the things I say are truths. Since I grew up, I realized that I learned a lot of positive and negative impacts of talking to others frankly. Now, I attempt to speak only useful things and try to express ideas without emotions at work. I agree that people can speak freely, but it depends on who you talk to and situations surround you.
Earth's comment reminds me of myself sometimes, although I hope less today than in the past. I love to argue. It's fun, and while that is OK in formal debates, not all of my friends enjoy an intense debate over dinner. And sometimes, as Earth says, it's better not to say something just because it's true.
DeleteIn my family, I try to practice not speaking when I'm with my mum, who sometimes says things that are totally wrong, or racist, or both. If she just says something wrong, I can usually ignore it, but sometimes she says something so offensive that I think she should be corrected, so I do. She doesn't like that, and my brothers and sisters perhaps wish I didn't do it, but just being old and senior and a mother do not seem to me good enough reasons to let some get away with saying things that are not only wrong, but racist or otherwise offensive.
On matters of public interest, I think the US gets it more right than every other nation, including my own. The 1st Amendment of the US Constitution, now more than 200 years old and the only constitution the US has ever had, gives very strong legal protection to the foundational democratic principle of free speech. My own nation's legal protections for free speech is strong, but the US does even better. As I said above, I agree with Earth's point that we should also consider whether or not someone will be offended by what we say, but sometimes the right thing to do is to offend people by saying what should be said, otherwise, the same bad old ways can easily continue. Since she knows I will speak up if she goes too far, my mum is a bit more careful about what she says when I'm present.
Thank you Emma for this very interesting article. I am also using Clubhouse to casually talk with my friends and also to listen to other people's talking. What I found the most interesting about Clubhouse is that sometimes you and a very famous celebrity are just one click away. You can ask questions and sometimes even talk to them directly. Without Clubhouse, this opportunity is rare.
ReplyDeleteHowever, users should bear in mind that Clubhouse is a public open conversation, meaning anyone can join or leave the chat anytime. Moreover, the identity of Clubhouse users are mostly untrackable. Therefore, you must be very careful when talking - or gossiping - in Clubhouse.
Coming back to Emma's question, I personally think people have the rights to speak and express their ideas freely, as long as the stories are not fake and the ideas are morally acceptable. The way listeners will perceive the story depends on how it is expressed and the context of the conversation. If you are saying the right thing in the right way at the right time, things will be fine. If not, you will get in trouble.
I read anik's comment before I wrote my reply to Earth's comment above, and had I not, would have said some similar things here.
DeleteHowever, anik uses a phrase that interested me, "morally acceptable." That's the sort of phrase that I think is often used to indicate what the writer likes or dislikes, but I'm sure what it might mean, so when I hear it or see it, I check whether the writer has made the meaning clear enough that we can decide whether something is morally acceptable or not. For example, in the US, a very large majority of Americans thought until recently that it was morally acceptable to say that gay people were evil and cursed by God, and they were all always wrong. That popular majority opinion was factually nonsense and morally bad. If god did say anything, that would make God a moral monster — and many Americans, a majority, would think it morally unacceptable to say that, so I'm wondering what anik meant by the very vague adjective phrase "morally acceptable." How is it to be decided what is and is not morally acceptable?
I very much like that anik's thoughtful comment raises so interesting a question, and wonder what others think about it.
Love how the way you compare the communication in the old times and new one(At least as my view).
ReplyDeleteFirstly I found out that Clubhouse is very useless, I can find any information that I want to know on the Podcast or the Youtube Channel that I want, but when my friend invite me, it is worth to try, many room in Clubhouse is specified for the one's interest, which allow me to choose and find more easier than podcast for something I want to know, and of course it's free and "Freely".
People in Thailand in these days are openly talking and discussing about everything, which I discover that it is Double-Bladed, the good side of Blade is the topics, heading that we can freely talk about, such as the politics, Financial or even the Future regimen system, it's undoubtedly great to discuss about this as the creative talking of knowledge development , but that's leading to the bad side of the Blade, when we can talk freely, some of them can twist some good thing into bad, without even use their Common Sense to analyze the information and the source or worse case, the imputation from the one who want to get the lights from people, manipulating them to think as the same.
For me Talking freely is great and very civilized, but in Thailand, I'm not sure that we are ready for THAT freely.
I would say that the emergence of Clubhouse applications is great. People, who join in the chat, could share ideas or ask questions directly to the speaker and it is a real time correspondence. The answer is fresh and responsive. Yesterday I listened to our former prime minister Taksin Shinawat talk on the Clubhouse app with the people under the name of ‘Meeting P’ Tony’. Many practical ideas are given to the audience. The new generation is eager and having fun joining the talk.
ReplyDeleteI like to see that people are able to converse under their own thoughts freely and the Clubhouse app serves the purpose. From the news I do not agree with the Chinese government that wanted to interfere with the people’s right of freedom of speech. I think the government should respect the principle of human rights.
For some Thai proverbs that are outdated and against the current mainstream.I think it might be the right time for Thailand to re-evaluate those kind of saying and substitute the new and more proper ones.