Journalism: Thai Journalist Day & What a cutting-edge journalist says about “Mainstream Thai Media”

/ March 5, 2011

Blog Note:

  • Today is the Thai journalist day & the social media is buzzing with congratulations

The royalist, elite and military rulers of Thailand-both loves and hate Thai Intel-that is a fact.

They hate Thai Intel-because Thai Intel hammers into their heads how utterly “Idiotic” they are-and yet they love Thai Intel because they use information in Thai Intel-to continue their rule over Thailand.

What ever is Thai Intel’s bottom-line impact-who cares? Thai Intel is just a small news and analysis-outfit.

But one of the news and analysis piece that “Literally Shook” the royalist, elite and military rulers of Thailand-is Thai Intel’s reporting that their pumping of nothing but “Propaganda” or “Fake News” into the Thai society, was hurting Thai investors in the Thai stock market, for example.

The fact is, the local Thai investors have lost money against foreigners-as the rule.

Why?

Thai Intel argues that it is because the local investors, they invest in the Thai stock market with mostly local “Fake” information.

Just go to the Thai Stock Market website for example-and look at the list of news organizations-they are all there, the royalist, elite and military rulers, but not a single one, from the many voices of democracy, liberty and justice.

Since the local information, is mostly “Fake” news or “Propaganda” that results in fake and wrong information that is needed for things like investments-for example.

In Thailand, politics, economics and business are closely linked. So when political news is “propagated” it impacts investors perception of economics and businesses.

There are so many others-of how politics, business and economics news inter-twine-and how “propaganda” is hurting everything.

For example, Thai Intel, the only media, quoting a Red Shirts telecom analyst- reported on the 3G, for example, saying:

“It is a state policy to slow communications advancement, because of fear of its impact in “Opening Up” Thailand to a more free flow of information.”

Off course, the 3G news in Thailand was then driving up the telecom shares, ahead of the auctioning of 3G licenses-in the Thai stock market.

But this Red Shirts telecom analyst-went short on the telecom stock around that time, again, noting the royalist, elite and military fear of 3G-based on a different analysis of the situation.

He made millions in the stock market-as telecom stocks in Thailand tanked as the Thai 3G got whacked, as he expected.

The bottom line is, Thai stock market-along with the Thai business and economy-needs “Real” news and information to function efficiently and effectively.

“No” Thai Intel is not heartless, as not to know and what “Fake News” does to the Thai human rights condition. But then, communicating how important human rights and the respect of life is-to the likes of the royalist, elite and military rulers of Thailand-is just a dead end street.

The following is from the Nation:

(To note that in the entire Nation Group, there is only the writer of the following article, that is providing “Real News”)

Legal barriers, political bias and other problems hinder mainstream media

Mon, 28/02/2011 – 07:56 | by prachatai

Pravit Rojanaphruk, The Nation

The mainstream Thai mass media faces a complex set of challenges ranging from legal barriers and political bias to other internal problems that prevent it from protecting the public interest and advancing freedom and democracy, Thailand’s first Asian Media Barometer report has found.

The report, presented on Friday by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, highlighted several challenges including the Internal Security Act, the lese majeste law and the Computer Crime Act, all of which lead to self-censorship. Other constraints include the undue influence of advertisers, the Army and media owners.

“Thai citizens and journalists still assert their right to freedom of expression – but with a certain and palpable degree of fear,” the report concluded.

Ten media professionals and experts, including this reporter, were invited in December to meet and discuss the Thai media in order to produce the first Asian Media Barometer (ANMB) report for Thailand.

The report said both citizens and journalists think twice about criticising powerful institutions such as the judiciary and the monarchy due to treason and lese majeste laws.

“This submission to the powers that be includes citizens being afraid of powerful media institutions or local mafia, and in the Deep South, of insurgents and the Army,” it said. “It includes media professionals being afraid of media owners. And it includes a witch hunt in the new social media networks, where people expressing their opinions are harassed by the state or those from the opposite political camp.”

Former senator Jon Ungpakorn, one of the contributors, said on Friday that the mainstream media, especially the print media, “heavily censored itself” from saying anything critical of the monarchy. Jon criticised the lack of local reporting about the Computer Crimes Act case against Jiranuch Premchaiporn, the editor of the Prachatai website, while Western papers such as The New York Times and the Guardian paid attention.

Jiranuch was charged for being too slow to delete comments made on the Prachatai web-board by 10 anonymous posters allegedly defaming the monarchy. Experts see the case as having deep repercussions for online freedom of expression. “Why don’t they report? They’re so docile!” said Jon.

Prasong Lertratanawisute, head of the Thai Journalists Association, speaking in a personal capacity, said Thai media had been taught not to report anything critical of the monarchy. He said it was Thai editors and not editors of The New York Times who risked being placed behind bars for lese majeste. “I’m not saying I agree or disagree with it. But in order to avoid the problem I’d rather not touch it,” he said, adding that those advocating critical discussion about the monarchy “shouldn’t express their heroism”.

The report also concluded that few civil society organisations exist to advocate freedom of expression, with some groups finding it acceptable if media from the opposite political camp are suppressed. It also touched upon the widespread problem of gender stereotypes, bias and patriarchy.

“Media organisations have no policy to promote gender sensitivity or equal employment opportunities. There is also little effort to give equal and fair representation to ethnic minorities or people with disabilities.”

The process of self-regulation was lacking or ineffective. “Media owners interfere both discreetly and openly when the gathering of news or political commentary results in exposing business affiliates or may threaten the generation of advertising revenue from the state or private companies.”

Related Articles

Related posts

Leave a comment