Thais fall too easily for rumour and superstition

The recent controversy over the prophecy that one of the country’s largest dams would burst on New Year’s Eve has shown how vulnerable Thai society is to rumours and speculation based on unscientific evidence.

Thongbai Khamsi, a 73-year-old man, was recently charged with causing public harm by raising a false alarm that one of the country’s largest dams would burst on New Year’s Eve. The old man from Chantaburi province became the talk of the town after making the prophecy on the YouTube website. 

Uncle Thongbai said his late son, who passed away 37 years ago, predicted that the Bhumiphol Dam would burst open on the night of December 31, 2011. Luckily, it did not. His son was supposedly five years old when he made the prediction, but it remains unclear whether Thongbai actually had a son or not. Nevertheless, the public went wild for the story.

The police subsequently summoned Uncle Thongbai and pressed charges against him. Thongbai was subject to a 15-day jail sentence, pending a two-year probation period. Several press outlets and TV talk shows were soon hunting Thongbai down to get him on TV and question him about why the dam did not break as he had predicted. 

The status of Thongbai, or his late son, known as “Pla Boo”, turned from highly regarded prophet to a clown overnight. The word “Pla Boo” has now become a metaphor for a silly and unfounded belief. 

But should Thongbai solely be blamed for creating national panic? After all, his prophecy would not have become this widely publicised if the media and the public had not pushed the issue so far.

Let’s start from the source of controversy. Like many YouTube clips, Pla Boo’s prophecy became a sensation because of quickly-spreading word of mouth. It resonated well with the psychology of many Thais, who have felt insecure after the recent massive flooding and the lack of reliable information from the government. 

Thongbai instantly connected with his audience after he claimed his son had correctly predicted that a tsunami would hit Thailand in 2004. Officials in Tak province, where the Bhumiphol Dam is located, said the false prediction caused a 90 per cent drop in tourist arrivals to the area during the holiday season, and a loss of Bt400 million in income.

It’s astonishing to see that while Thais are considered among the world’s most active users of social networks, many are quick to be taken in by unscientific predictions. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever he or she chooses, but in the Thongbai case, everyone who helped spread the news is responsible for creating public panic. If  Thongbai’s prediction had not been shared or forwarded, the audience would have been limited. 

The mainstream media also plays a role in propelling this kind of prophecy, and in playing up superstitions, such as suggesting on front pages that the vehicle number plate of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra could provide a winning lottery number. 

But Thongbai is not alone in predicting catastrophic events. Many social media outlets talk about the Mayan prophecy of the day when the world will end. But the mainstream media elsewhere have not picked up and framed such stories as seriously as the Thai media featured the “Pla Boo” craze. One of the talk show hosts pressed Thongbai in front of the camera about what he would be willing to do if the dam did not break on the traditional Thai new year day in April. They are all responsible for fuelling the hype.

Prophecies and predictions are meant to make us cautious and prepared. But a more scientific-minded public should learn how to digest such information with care and knowledge. Otherwise, we will be vulnerable to gossip and rumour, which can be dangerous, especially when the social media help spread unfounded information like wildfire.