Junta committee insists on role in media reform

[webfact]

Junta committee insists on role in media reform

By Wasamon Audjarint 
The Nation

 

Jirachai Moonthongroi

 

The junta-appointed media reform committee has stood firm that, despite long-going opposition from media organisations, state authority has to play a part in media reform.

 

In a model proposed to its head committee last December, the committee proposed that government officers should play a “supportive role” in the upcoming national media council, according to the committee’s head Jirachai Moonthongroi.

 

“They would act like mere secretaries, doing documents and inviting experts to join the arena. They would help shoulder work from those professionals,” Jirachai said.

 

“If state authority doesn’t play this coordinating role, media’s self-regulation would just return to the same old days,” he went on. “I insist that authority has to participate in media affairs.”

 

The establishment of the so-called national media council is included in a media regulation bill draft proposed by another junta-appointed reform body, the defunct National Reform Steering Assembly.

 

It was a reason why the draft received strong objections from media professionals. They took the view that the stipulation to include two permanent secretaries in the council could allow state authorities to interfere in media affairs.

 

Jirachai, a former permanent secretary to the PM’s Office under Prayut’s government, believes that an officer in his old position would be the best fit for the reform council.

 

Like many initiatives under this government, proposed media reform would be done under “government, private, people cooperation”, also known as the Pracharat scheme.

 

The scheme would include government funding to support media to produce content to “cultivate good culture that is crucial but may not make profits and attract advertisements”.

 

Jirachai also proposed other centralising proposals, including one for broadcasting frequency to be wholly state-owned rather than partially owned by a public company and independent organisation as is now the case.

 

“With that model, it is easier for authority to distribute frequencies to be owned by various kind of content makers,” he said.

 

“We see many redundancies in media today. Private companies have to pay to rent the frequencies and that would beneficially generate more income for the state.”

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30339364

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-02-21

 

[baboon]

Why? The junta won't exist this time next year.

No, but seriously, folks...

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, baboon said:

Why? The junta won't exist this time next year.

No, but seriously, folks...

Does not really matter..whoever is next in power will love the extra control they get over the pesky media. Add this one to defamation and other laws to make sure full control is there. 

 

Unless of course I am mistaken and a new goverment would actually turn back extra controls like this and give up extra power. But if that was the case would defamation not already been made a non criminal process but a juridical process between people. (no jailtime ect). Never saw a goverment give up that stick.. so i doubt they will give up this stick if it materializes. 

[YetAnother]

38 minutes ago, webfact said:

If state authority doesn’t play this coordinating role, media’s self-regulation would just return to the same old days,” he went on.

government should control some things but the media is not one of them; the media plays an important role in social checks and balances;

as 'bad' as the media may have been before, and i have my doubts, that is/was preferable to govt-media

[PatOngo]

[John Drake]

17 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

government should control some things but the media is not one of them; the media plays an important role in social checks and balances;

as 'bad' as the media may have been before, and i have my doubts, that is/was preferable to govt-media

Governments in the West, especially Europe, control the media through several avenues. I don't see how the Thais can do any worse.

[JonnyF]

Ah, State Controlled Media. The Junta really is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

When are the elections again? November, right?

[Oziex1]

1 hour ago, John Drake said:

Governments in the West, especially Europe, control the media through several avenues. I don't see how the Thais can do any worse.

Are you sure I think it may be the opposite where media moguls act as king makers and promote the candidates and parties of their choosing.

[yellowboat]

Look, they are just taking precautions.   A few years ago Thailand ranked 156 in a press freedom polling of 180 countries.  Today it is 142.  Who knows?  One day they could catch the police states of Burma, 131 or Cambodia 132.   Then where would they be ?  They want to go back 156 and that cannot happen without the juntas help. 

 

https://rsf.org/en/ranking. 

[Emster23]

Maybe check translation. "Repression" better choice than "reform".

“I insist that authority has to participate in media affairs.” ... Already do: make absurd statements and policy, then media must figure out how to report without facing draconian defamation laws.

[Ricardo]

Luckily the social-media are, to some extent, by-passing the media which all governments are happy to monitor and regulate & control, with luck this may eventually increase peoples' awareness & freedom-of-speech.

 

But I'm an optimist.

 

I think the OP makes the case for turkeys voting against Christmas, or politicians against transparency, the real question is can they do anything about it ?  China might suggest not.  We shall see.

[DM07]

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

Governments in the West, especially Europe, control the media through several avenues. I don't see how the Thais can do any worse.

Oh...please!

So you are comparing whatever- conspiracy- you- see to the completely abolishing freedom of the press in Thailand!

Yeah....boooo-hooo....in Europe, people are so oppressed!

Thailand alone is really on the path to freedom!

 

There has to be one on every thread!

[sawadee1947]

first step to "GLEICHSCHALTUNG" by the Nazis

[Media1]

8 hours ago, robblok said:

Does not really matter..whoever is next in power will love the extra control they get over the pesky media. Add this one to defamation and other laws to make sure full control is there. 

 

Unless of course I am mistaken and a new goverment would actually turn back extra controls like this and give up extra power. But if that was the case would defamation not already been made a non criminal process but a juridical process between people. (no jailtime ect). Never saw a goverment give up that stick.. so i doubt they will give up this stick if it materializes. 

No it won't work

[Media1]

We don't want to expose the generals impossible wealth on salaries and the police exceptional.wealth. Most don't have the education if a 17 year old western graduate.

[timendres]

14 hours ago, webfact said:

“They would act like mere secretaries, doing documents and inviting experts to join the arena. They would help shoulder work from those professionals,” Jirachai said.

 

“If state authority doesn’t play this coordinating role, media’s self-regulation would just return to the same old days,” he went on. “I insist that authority has to participate in media affairs.”

Mere secretaries?! Honestly, my brain just did a segfault. Orwell is rotfl.

Edited February 21, 2018 by timendres