But, criticism levelled at perceived cultural insensitivity in the original will hopefully serve as a lesson for those wanting to promote unity amid cultural diversity in the Kingdom.

The song, first released by the EC on May 25, swiftly attracted an outburst of disapproval on social media when people heard it.

Pro-human rights academics and activists denounced the EC’s song as insulting local people in the North and the Northeast (Isaan).

“On behalf of a Northeasterner [northeasterners], I feel so painful when listening to this song. You [the song’s working group] praise people in the South as pro-democracy, pro-liberal, but instruct [insult] the northerners and Isaan people not to let others deceive and induce them [when voting in the referendum],” Khon Kaen University religion lecturer Surapos Taweesak wrote recently on hisFacebook page.

The EC’s controversial song was first composed with different parts sung in different regional dialects. It also borrowed regional music instruments in a bid to catch local people’s attention, according to Prayong Cheunyen, a national artist.

EC member Dhirawat Dhirarojvit, whose team is responsible for the campaign song, said the working group only wanted to encourage people to study the draft charter before the referendum date in a bid to get a high and quality turnout.

According to an EC source, before the song was rolled out, it had been edited up to seven times. The working group – made up of EC members, the songwriter and experts – scrutinised and approved the final version, she said. But the panel had no idea it would insult people and trigger such controversy.

Songwriter Sunyaluck Donsri, who is now a monk, told The Sunday Nation the lyrics were written based on the EC’s concept.

He said the agency wished to convey five key messages through the song: that the constitution is a foundation of public administration; that people should thoroughly study the charter draft before exercising their voting rights; people should not let others influence the way they vote; that the country’s 65 million people are aware of democracy and the referendum on August 7; and that whether people vote “yes” or “no” is a matter for each of them to decide.

The monk said he had no intention of insulting northerners and people from Isaan, as he was also a “son of Isaan”, and did not think critics would launch such an attack on the song.

“The lyrics aren’t written to describe the characteristics of northerners and Isaan people. The lyrics were written to follow the EC’s five objectives, and we allocated them to different parts of the song,” he explained.

The song stresses that people should not let others influence their voting decision and should instead examine the charter draft by themselves. It merely happened to have been conveyed in the Isaan dialect and composition, he said.

This led people to claim that the song looked down on Isaan people, saying it implied that they were naive and in need of advice, the songwriter added.

Another controversial aspect of the lyrics lay in the part done with a northern dialect, which says that northerners should not let others induce them to vote in a particular way and should carefully study the draft.

This led to accusations that the words suggest northerners are uneducated people, who need to be cautious when studying the draft, he said.

Speaking in defence of the song, Doi Inthanon, a prominent songwriter from the North, commented that for such an event as the referendum, it was perfectly fine to add messages in order to educate listeners.

By writing the song based on regional composition, it could help attract more local people as their culture had been reflected through the song, he said.

“I think the song has been beautifully composed, if we listen to it thoroughly,” he added.

Despite the composer’s praise, the song continues to raise questions over cultural sensitivity.

Sirote Klampaiboon, an independent political critic, said the criticism mirrored the working group’s lack of cultural sensitivity and ignorance of existing political conflicts among the regions in recent times.

He noted that the song would not in any case attract a high turnout as the EC expected, because in practice the agency was not allowing open and inclusive debate on the charter draft, which he felt would be a far more effective approach to raising people’s awareness of the referendum.

Pinkaew Laungaramsri, a sociologist at Chiang Mai University, suggested that the referendum song should not separate regions by composing it based on different regional dialects and lyrics, in order to avoid “reproduction or repetition of certain characteristics” of people in the regions. Following the storm over the first version, the EC’s song-production group decided to rewrite it and launch a second version in an attempt to end argument about it.

In the second version, controversial parts have been replaced. For example, in the part concerning northerners, the lyrics which said, “We, the Northern folks, do not let others induce us. [We] have to keep on studying [the draft]” have now been changed to “Come together to the referendum, kinsfolk be at ease, Thai folks have fun.”

Though the song has been rewritten, Pinkaew said the feelings of some people may have already been hurt, and they would therefore be unlikely be listen to the new version.

In any case, what had happened in the writing of the referendum song should never be repeated, and should instead serve as a lesson for the composition of any future songs of this nature, he stressed.