The sudden departure from Thailand of the ex-News Of The World stringer who once proudly displayed a banner for the defunct tabloid at the top of his blog raises questions about defamation.

The only surprise to me was that it took so long. Despite the claims of support from other Bangkok correspondents I knew the majority seethed at his blinkered UK tabloid style of reporting where he continued to accuse the entire army, police force and courts of corruption.

There were rumblings of a serious Lese Majeste charge in the background as well which I reckon prompted him fleeing without notice.

Other journalists say he was making life difficult for them as it would be no different to accusing all of Britain's courts & judges of being corrupt.

Thailand has some very strict defamation laws. Interestingly Tasmania is to introduce similar but they do have another side to them in that they can be used to silence people.

In Thailand you can be sued by a corporation for defaming them. This is on the understanding that to (falsely) accuse a business of corruption you are automatically accusing the owner(s) who may have spent decades building up a good name.

Those owners then face "loss of face" amongst their peers. Westerners seem totally ignorant of what that really means & blunder on accordingly.

## the ones who really understand this are the Americans who have an entirely different way of getting their way diplomatically.

The worst I've found in Asia are the Australians and British who arrogantly try to impose their moral concepts on societies 1000s of years older than them.

There are also strict laws that govern internet publication. For all the benefits of the internet it has also given JK's infamous Green Ink Brigade total freedom to defame & distort.

Yet even Brits are ignorant here : it is a criminal offense to knowingly publish false claims about someone under the Communications Act 2003 as several Twitterers have discovered yet 1000s of others blunder on breaking the law.