Media Requested To Focus On Constructive News

[Jai Dee]

PM’s Secretary calls for the media to focus on constructive news

Secretary to the Prime Minister requests the media to focus on constructive news to create an atmosphere of reconciliation in the country. He also asks the September 19th Group against Coup d’État to revise their action.

According to PM’s Secretary Gen.Phongthep Tesprateep (พงษ์เทพ เทพประทีป), the group has requested Gen.Prem Tinsulanonda (เปรม ติณสูลานนท์), the President of the Privy Council and Statesman, to reconsider his political stance. The Secretary says he does not want to criticize the group’s request but wants it to think carefully whether its action benefit the country.

Gen.Phongthep also says he believes that if the group talks with the government, it will understand the government better. He suggests that those who do not agree with the government can voice their complaints or opinions via the government’s complaint center.

However, he reminds them that the center only focuses on problems of a group of people, not an individual, and the government needs time to implement solutions to the problems.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 20 March 2007

[taxexile]

Prime Minister requests the media to focus on constructive news to create an atmosphere of reconciliation in the country.

sound like they have copied "thai visas'" latest policy changes ?

[Scott]

As I recall, Mr. Thaksin said the same thing. He didn't like the negative press coverage he was getting.

I am not sure, but isn't this called censorship?

[Martin]

This OP could do with 'a bit of meat on its bones'.

Exactly what is this group hoping to achieve?; and what elucidation would the government be thinking it could bring to the minds of the group in dialogue?

[Barney_the_Dinosaur]

A call for the media to report good news is usually the last resort of a desperate government.

[ColPyat]

This OP could do with 'a bit of meat on its bones'.

Exactly what is this group hoping to achieve?; and what elucidation would the government be thinking it could bring to the minds of the group in dialogue?

Given these "requests" for only "positive news" in the medias, it is not that easy to find out from the medias what the 19th Sept. network tries to achieve.

You may have to go and speak with the members and leaders yourself to find something out that you should be able to find out from the medias.

[h90]

As I recall, Mr. Thaksin said the same thing. He didn't like the negative press coverage he was getting.

I am not sure, but isn't this called censorship?

Censorship, come on.... No no! Just the press isn't allowed to tell bad lies....

Like the ugly lies before that Thaksin is corrupt or now the ugly lies that the gouverment has really no idea about what they do.....

But not that is not censorship thats protection against lies which confuse people.

Maybe the worst liars can put in a kind of camps, no no thats not a jail, a camp where thy get teached about the true......

Greetings from George Orwell

[Hampstead]

This seems an opening shot in the form of a mild threat against those using their voice to oppose the coup.

Interesting the nation today has an article dismissing the protest as just taksin's followers! which is just mild propaganda at work!

But what if many of these people are genuine in just wanting more freedom and a better democracy and less rule and control by the elite!

More and more mild threats,control and censorship, will then have thousands more people marching and protesting in the coming months from all different backgrounds and from various different political party affiliations causing real friction in thailand.

[Jai Dee]

Free the airwaves from state control

The government must rise above vested interests and make broadcast media reform a top priority

The debate on the desirability of creating a public service broadcasting body similar to the United Kingdom's British Broadcasting Corporation, the US Public Broadcasting Service or Japan's NHK is being clouded by public confusion over its role in society, the organisational set-up and financial arrangements. Many people are confusing an autonomous public broadcasting corporation with an independent commercial television network. People can be forgiven for their ignorance or lack of understanding given the fact that the idea of one television network being set apart to devote itself to the public good by keeping people better informed is quite new. But government leaders, particularly Prime Minister Surayud, must not be let off the hook for their unintelligible mumbling that seems to have added to the confusion.

The prime minister has failed to make a clear distinction between the importance of creating a public broadcasting network to offer quality television that aims primarily to improve society - which will be good for the country in the long term - and the immediate need to rebuild iTV, now known as TITV, as a viable commercial station relatively free from state control. Surayud on a number of occasions referred to public service broadcasting and independent television as if they were the same thing. Put simply, the planned state-subsidised public service broadcasting network seeks to offer quality programming regardless of what the masses want - as opposed to a market-driven independent commercial network like TITV which must cater to popular tastes, rely on advertisers for its survival and compete successfully with other networks to survive. Theoretically, both public service broadcasting and independent commercial networks should do well in their own ways if the government maintains a hands-off policy.

It remains unclear whether Surayud really has it all mixed up or whether he is just stalling for time. Either way, he is exposing himself as an indecisive and ineffectual leader. His military-backed interim government, which has committed itself to get rid of the culture of deceit and corruption perpetrated by his deposed predecessor, Thaksin Shinawatra, only has months to go before a free election is held and democracy is restored.

If Surayud wants to be taken seriously as a restorer of democracy, he should prioritise both the creation of a public service broadcasting body and the rebuilding of TITV as an independent commercial network. After all, memories are still fresh about how the former iTV was grossly manipulated and used by Thaksin as a propaganda tool to mislead and misinform the public. This lead to the weakening of country's democracy, corruption of the political system and divisiveness between the rural masses and urban middle class.

Surayud needs to be reminded that Thaksin was not the only person who had been guilty of manipulating the broadcast media to gain political advantage and to further his interests. Various state agencies and bureaucrats who run them, as well as the armed forces, have had monopolistic control of the broadcast media for too long. All mainstream television and radio stations, with their far-reaching transmission capability, are controlled by the military, police and government agencies. They have been commercially exploited through shady deals, generating billions of baht each year that is largely unaccounted for.

Successive governments have failed in their half-hearted attempts at reforming the broadcast media because the armed forces and government agencies put up stiff resistance to any plan to take back transmission frequencies and redistribute them in a way that would ensure free flow of information. This denies the public its right to know, and all citizens of their right to freedom of expression. Such media reform is based on the principle that broadcast frequencies are a resource belonging to all Thai citizens.

The sustainability of the country's democracy depends on the successful implementation of broadcast media reform. Surayud and the Council for National Security, who call themselves restorers of democracy, must spell out clearly how they plan to undertake such reform. Together the Surayud administration and the military junta, which currently wield absolute political power, have a unique opportunity to push through broadcast media reform without fear or favour. Failure to do so will not only undermine their legacy but also put the country's democracy into further uncertainty.

Editorial Opinion from The Nation - 20 March 2007

[Mid]

good news is that it's a backhand acknowledgment of the POWER of the media ....................

problem is nothing short of a complete overhaul will suffice such is the current dire strait of national media

[pumpuiman]

I can't understand why the dictators are saying this crap publicly.

Shouldn't they be making threats to the media behind the scenes?

What a way to overthrow a country....telling everyone what your ridiculous ideas are before implementing them.

Do they think if they are honest about their intentions to violate human rights, the people won't mind?

[wintermute]

I can't understand why the dictators are saying this crap publicly.

Shouldn't they be making threats to the media behind the scenes?

What a way to overthrow a country....telling everyone what your ridiculous ideas are before implementing them.

Do they think if they are honest about their intentions to violate human rights, the people won't mind?

Which indicates to me that they aren't the efficient controlling type of evil that the Nazi regime or Stalin was. They are the bumbling incompetent banana republic type of "evil" that doesn't know what the definition is. They just know the big mean press is saying bad bad things about them and they want it to stop but they don't know how to go about doing it. To me this indicates that they are disorganized, incompetent, and without strong leadership to pull it all together. They are grasping for straws and policies to save the sinking ship.

[Ricardo]

IMHO this has to be better, than a regime which happily sends in the black-shirts, or arms the Forestry Department workers, to use against a democratic & peaceful legal-protest, no ?

Nice to see the Nation allowed to print an article, like the one just posted, which makes some good points.

[andy1308]

As someone working in the mediavthe problem is not so much what is happening and being reporting inside Thailand, but more what happens here and how it is reported around the world. Thailand is generally seen as risky in terms of investment and unsafe in terms of security. And there's nothing the Government can do about those kind of reports, expect by their positive actions to solve these concerns.

[jumnien]

The words of anti-Thaksin free speech activist Supinya say it best - "The junta is far more dangerous than Thaksin ever was."