Saturday, January 18, 2020
Get Adobe Flash player

iPhone users are the biggest sexters

Posted by pakin On May - 6 - 2014 ADD COMMENTS

If you own an iPhone, you’re more likely to be sending risqué messages to your significant other — or at least that’s the finding of a new survey.

The poll, conducted by YouGov and commissioned by, found that a third of iPhone owners — over 30 percent — had sent a rude text to their partner (or indeed, to someone else instead of their partner for one of those truly foot-in-mouth moments).

That was markedly more than the amount that those using other handsets had sexted, with those on BlackBerry devices (there are still some of them out there) having the second highest percentage of rude message senders with 21 percent. 17 percent of folks using Samsung devices admitted to sexting (of course, the numbers are likely a fair bit higher than those who actually admitted to doing so — but that will be true across the board).

19 percent of respondents said they had sent a sext (or worse still a naughty pic) to the wrong person, and of those, one in twenty had accidentally sent their mother-in-law said message for the ultimate in embarrassment.

According to Sky News, Duncan Spencer, the MD of, commented: “It does seem that iPhone owners are certainly a little more risqué when it comes to their mobile communications”.

“The moral of the story is that if you are going to send cheeky messages, check before you sext, otherwise you might find your private photo going viral. There are some things that can never be unseen”.

Wise words indeed — as we all know, these days, everything lives forever on the Internet.

Published under license from, a Net Communities Ltd Publication. All rights reserved.

Is there something Thailand can learn from the Euromaidan, the ongoing political demonstration in Ukraine that has ousted President Viktor Yanukovych but is still far from achieving its ideal goal of seeing real democracy?

“Enough is enough. That’s what people should learn to say to corrupt politicians,” Nataliya Vernyhora, a hotel executive-turned-activist, told me without hesitation.

Five months on, with Yanukovych out of power and Russian annexation of Crimea, Independence Square in central Kiev today is still bustling with demonstrators demanding a say in how Ukrainians are governed.

They should have ended the demonstration with Yanukovych’s departure but they continue to stay on because they believe that their mission is still far from accomplished.

The crisis in Crimea might have diverted the world’s attention from Ukraine’s domestic political problems, but the Euromaidan protesters have no intention of dispersing. Russia’s annexation of Crimea has only added a new sense of urgency to the months-long protest.

Like all the other protesters at Maidan Square that I talked to, Vernyhora admitted that getting rid of Yanukovych and his corrupt band of political cohorts didn’t spell an end to Ukraine’s political woes.

The interim government led by Prime Minister Arseniy P Yatsenyuk, a veteran public official, has not offered much hope that Ukraine is heading for a better political future.

“We are here to make our voice heard. We want politicians to know that they cannot ignore people’s wishes,” said a young Ukrainian in a national guard uniform.

He had responded to the new government’s call for a mobilisation of reserves and volunteers to counter Russia’s military moves following the annexation of Crimea.

Angry Ukranians started pouring into Independence Square on November 21 after then president Yanukovych ditched a partnership deal with the European Union that had been years in the making in favour of seeking help from Moscow to save its sinking economy. The uprising by Ukrainians is unprecedented and some even call it a “revolution”.

The pro-Moscow Yanukovych’s sudden U-turn on the EU deal was the last straw. Ukranians had already been seething over what they saw as blatant abuse of power and rampant corruption.

“Bandits get out” was a rallying cry that was heard everyday at the square.

“Yanukovych was the biggest bandit of them all. He was the most corrupt leader we have ever had,” said another protester.

“Bandits” includes members of the former president’s immediate family and those in his inner circle.

The protesters cannot be blamed for believing that Yanukovych and his political henchmen were responsible for making Ukraine one of the most corrupt countries in Eastern Europe.

Transparency International put Ukraine at 144th place on its Corruption Perception Index in 2013 (far worse than Thailand, which ranked 102nd out of 177 countries).

From taxi drivers to political activists and journalists, there is this strong sentiment that corruption is the biggest problem dragging down Ukraine’s economy.

Speaking to me after a press conference on Friday, Ihor Smeshko, former head of the Security Service of Ukraine and now leader of a political party that positions itself as a new alternative to the existing political establishments, said nothing had changed since the ouster of Yanukovych.

Smeshko echoed calls for Ukraine to have a system that held politicians accountable for their wrongdoings.

“What we need is a reform of the political system,” he said, but admitted that nobody in power is interested in doing that because “politicians are only interested in elections” but not the interests of society.

He also stressed the need for civil society to be active in monitoring those in power.

“Only an active civil society can bring about changes,” he said.

That’s exactly the reason why protesters like Vernyhora still find it necessary to continue to be part of the Euromaidan movement.

She was there when the temperature was minus 20 and when snipers and thugs harassed and killed protesters.

And she is still there today, sometimes doing menial jobs like peeling potatoes and preparing food from home for fellow die-hard demonstrators.

Few at Maidan Square are aware of a similar street protest that has been going on in Bangkok. But someone who knows something about it asked me: “Have the Thai people won yet?”

The way things are, it’s evident that both Thais and Ukrainians are far from achieving what they really want. Street protests may unseat governments but do not guarantee that cleaner politics and good governance is waiting on their horizon.

They have both stood up and said “enough is enough”. Now they need to stay on the long journey until they are certain that their voice and their political will is respected.

(Reuters) – Thailand is lifting a state of emergency in Bangkok, taking a step to restore some confidence as anti-government protests subside, though the crisis has entered a new phase with Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra besieged by legal challenges.

The protesters, mainly from Bangkok and the south, have been trying since November to oust Yingluck and rid the country of the influence of her brother, self-exiled former premier Thaksin Shinawatra who was toppled by the army in 2006.

The government imposed a state of emergency two months ago, but largely resisted taking heavy-handed action, though 23 people have been killed during the unrest, most in shootings and grenade blasts.

The protests have waned in recent weeks and are now mostly confined to Lumpini Park in Bangkok’s central business district and a few other sites.

But the threat of further violence remains real, especially after changes at the top of the pro-Thaksin “red shirt” movement at the weekend, with a new, more militant leader promising “to fight tooth and nail” to defend Yingluck.

The emergency will be lifted from Wednesday after a decision taken at a cabinet meeting held on Tuesday in Nakhon Pathom province, about 80 km (50 miles) from Bangkok.

Yingluck arrived for the meeting in a wheelchair after slipping as she stepped out of a car on Saturday in the northern city of Chiang Mai, her stronghold.

“The cabinet lifted the state of emergency to instil more confidence in the private sector and tourist industry,” she told reporters.

In its place, the government will use the Internal Security Act, a less harsh law that still allows the authorities to impose curfews, operate security checkpoints and restrict the movement of protesters as needed.

“Lifting the emergency law should have a positive impact on businesses. Many really felt the pinch and lost customers because the state of emergency was in place, including tour operators who saw huge cancellations,” said political analyst Kan Yuenyong at Siam Intelligence Unit.

“It should also improve the state’s image because rights groups tend to view the emergency law as draconian. But, ultimately, no law can help the government contain the protests if they flare up again.”

The stock market and baht currency rose slightly on the government’s move, which had been expected, although that was enough to take the baht to a three-month high.


The government set the 60-day emergency from January 22 to help contain protests in the run-up to a general election on February 2, but most of its measures were barely used, especially after a court ruled on February 19 that some had been imposed illegally.

The election in February was disrupted by protesters in almost 70 of the 375 constituencies, leaving the House of Representatives without a quorum to elect a new prime minister.

The Constitutional Court has accepted a petition to consider annulling the election, which could further delay the formation of a government.

Yingluck, whose Puea Thai Party had been expected to win the vote, heads a caretaker administration with limited powers. She faces a slew of court cases that could bring her down, including a charge of dereliction of duty over a rice subsidy scheme that owes money to hundreds of thousands of farmers.

Tourism has suffered during the unrest. Arrivals were down 4.1 percent in January and February compared to the same high-season period last year, according to the tourism ministry.

Pitaya Tanadamrongsak, managing director of Dongfeng Motors (Thailand), a unit of China’s Dongfeng Motor Corp that announced an expansion in Thai vehicle production on Tuesday, told Reuters the business community needed more than the lifting of an emergency decree.

“In order for the country to be fundamentally strong, I think the conflict has to stop … I do hope the government and opposition will find a conclusion and look forward,” he said.

“Only by having a stable government can we really take advantage of the AEC,” he added, referring to a Southeast Asian economic community set to start in late 2015 that Thailand ought to be well placed to benefit from, given its export prowess.

(Additional reporting by Panarat Thepgumpanat and Pairat Temphairojana; Writing by Amy Sawitta Lefevre; Editing by Alan Raybould and Simon Cameron-Moore)

(Reuters) – Thailand’s anti-corruption agency weighed charges of negligence against Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra on Thursday as the leader of protests aimed at forcing her from power suggested a televised debate after weeks of refusing to talk.

The charges relate to a disastrous rice subsidy scheme that paid farmers above the market price and has run out of funds, adding to the government’s woes as farmers – normally the prime minister’s biggest supporters – demand their money.

More than 300 government supporters gathered outside the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) in north Bangkok where the charges were due to be discussed with Yingluck’s lawyers, as riot police stood guard inside the complex.

Because of the protest, the hearing had to be moved to a different location. Yingluck, who has stayed mostly out of Bangkok in recent days, did not attend.

The anti-government protesters elsewhere in the city, whose disruption of a general election this month has left Thailand in paralysis, want to topple Yingluck and erase the influence of her brother, ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra, seen by many as the real power in the country.

Protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban, known for making dramatic gestures without always following through, said he was willing to appear in a live television debate with Yingluck after weeks of refusing any form of talks.

“Just tell me when and where,” he told supporters. “Give us two chairs and a microphone and transmit it live on television so the people can see.”

Yingluck gave a guarded response.

“The talks have to have a framework though I am not sure what that framework would look like,” she told reporters in the town of Chiang Mai in the north, a Thaksin stronghold. “But many parties have to be involved because I alone cannot answer on behalf of the Thai people.”

A general election this month was disrupted by the protesters and is unlikely to be completed for many weeks.

The protesters want to set up a “people’s council” of unspecified worthy people to spearhead political reform before new polls are held, hoping that will stop parties loyal to the self-exiled Thaksin winning.

They have been on Bangkok’s streets since November and have blocked main intersections for weeks to press their case.

Intermittent bursts of gunfire and grenade blasts have become routine at night in the political conflict, which has taken a heavy toll on tourism in the capital, famous for its golden temples and racy bars.

Rock guitarist Eric Clapton has pulled out of a Bangkok concert scheduled for Sunday because of deteriorating security.


The NACC is investigating at least 15 cases against Yingluck and her party members, ranging from allegations of corruption in water projects to moves to make the Senate a fully elected body, which a court has ruled illegal.

It alleges Yingluck was negligent for not ending the rice subsidy program which it says was riddled with corruption. If found guilty, she faces removal from office and a five-year ban from politics.

“If her legal team hears the charges against her, she has 15 days to present evidence and after that the NACC will deliberate the case further,” Wittaya Arkompitak, deputy secretary of the anti-graft commission, told Reuters.

Yingluck has denied negligence and accused the agency of bias, noting that a rice corruption case involving the previous administration had made no progress after more than four years.

The protests have triggered violence in which 21 people have been killed and more than 700 wounded.

The crisis pits the mainly middle-class and southern anti-government demonstrators, who are backed by the royalist establishment, against the largely rural supporters of Yingluck and Thaksin from the north and northeast.

Both sides have armed activists and some pro-government leaders have called for Thailand to be divided along north-south political lines, prompting talk of a possible civil war.

The standoff also raises the question of whether the military will step in, as it has many times before, most recently in 2006 to remove Thaksin, although the army chief has ruled out intervention this time.

But it has stepped up its security presence in Bangkok after two nights of violence.

(Additional reporting by Aukkarapon Niyomyat, Pracha Hariraksapitak and Pairat Temphairojana; Writing by Nick Macfie; Editing by Alan Raybould and Robert Birsel)