Behind the smiles
Re: "Govt denies seizing BBC footage", (BP, Sept 19).
The BBC has sparked a firestorm among both Thais and foreigners alike with its three-part documentary by Zara McDermott, which exposes the "dark side" of Thailand.
Many have expressed their reservations online about its portrayal of the country and its inhabitants.
Be that as it may, it acts as a good corrective against the portrayal of Thailand as the "land of smiles" and a paradise for tourists, as the mandarins in the Thai tourism industry insist.
Far from being a paradise, the BBC documentary highlights how crime and violence are quite endemic in the nation, with many foreigners and Thais being jailed for simple drug offences or mistakenly insulting the monarchy.
Further, it discusses how human trafficking has become a big problem in the prostitution industry.
The documentary also points out that Thailand has once again inaugurated a new government, showing once again how unstable and corrupt the political system is, with there being numerous coups since Thailand became a democracy in 1932.
It also talks about some of the scams that foreigners may face in tourist centres, among other things.
I could say more, but I think you get the picture here.
The documentary shows that, even though Thailand may be a good country to visit, one must proceed with caution once there.
Paul
Empty Phuket claims
Re: "Phuket's image 'marred by rampant cannabis use'", (BP, Sept 19).
The mildly diverting and highly uninformative article "Phuket's image 'marred by rampant cannabis use'" contains what appear to be factual claims about the effect cannabis use is having on tourism and quality of life on Phuket.
It reads like fantasy made up to serve a dodgy narrative. What statistics or other factual evidence back up the claims made?
The evidence is conspicuous by its perfect absence. How many of those "high-quality tourists", for example, has Phuket lost? A million? A thousand? A hundred? Ten? Two? Or might the number in fact be negative?
If anyone knows, it's being kept secret.
Would truth-telling on this be another threat to national security? Or is it just that ignorance again rules as Thai law too often dictates? Absent some solid numbers, the claims made are vacuous. And that's before we get to the more important issues of what is just.
Felix Qui
Figures fudged
Re: "Tourism crash", (PostBag, Sept 18).
In reference to Mr Jellison's letter regarding tourist numbers, rather than his admission of suffering from dyslexia, I believe he means dyscalculia, as his figures don't add up. A drop in numbers of 7.1% does not translate to 7 million tourists, as that would imply a previous figure of 100m. The article states that the number dropped 7.1% to 23m, so a fall from 24.7m arrivals, or 1.7m.
This is significantly less than 7m, but still a relatively large decrease that Thailand needs to address sooner rather than later. Given Mr Jellison's questionable math, might I suggest there might be an opportunity for him to work in TAT's marketing department?
Shane
Scams to blame
Re: "Tourism crash", (PostBag, Sept 18).
I would guess without substance that the tourists' numbers have dropped simply because of the scams. The jet ski scam in particular. How many times have we heard or read about tourists being ripped off by the jet ski guy? That word went around the world and back again.
And don't forget dual pricing.
Alfonso
