Dtv To Launch Jan 19, Seen As A New Mouthpiece For Pro-thaksin Camp

[plachon]

Jon Ungpakorn is asking for no-strings "FREE" media....TV similar to BBC and others,......all of the above are just political mouthpieces,....hence not "FREE"

Why doesn't he gather up his legions of supporters and believers and start up MTV (Marxist TeleVision) and thus create his own "free media"?

Is he a Marxist?...I don't know,but what I have read about the good he has done for the Insurance issue on AIDS patients,reporting of AIDS in the Press, the presure he put on giant pharmacetical companys to make cheap drugs available to the poor does not sound Marxist to me more like good causes by a decent man.Anyway its allways easy to paint someone "RED"or "Marxist"(Ken Livingston's previous nicknames) but you don't address the point he and I are making which is about how to ensure that the media in Thailand is impartial in politics.Have you any ideas you would like to share with us or are you happy the way things are?

I'm not painting him red, he's painting himself red...

"I'm a Marxist, and so are many friends in the party. We don't deny it. We're reviving the classic Marxism"

Mr. Ungpakorn / October 30, 2007

While it's a bit surprising you don't seem to know even some of the basic fundamental philosophies of someone you endorse, it doesn't mean that open media shouldn't be as free as possible.

To that end, it's a dramatic and very welcome change that the new government is not going to stifle DTV in the same manner that PTV was during the previous governments.

that Marxist quote, btw, was from your other personal endorsement...

I have just found this and I believe it would enlighten many Thais and also Farangs about some of the deep problems Thai society is facing at the moment www.prachatai.com

ok

Sriracha John I only know limited amount about John Ungpakorn,I admit...i am glad to here though you agree with me and him that public broadcasting is the way forward(that is what your saying isn't it?)Quote "free as possible" More importantly though please let us know where you get all your knowledge from, is it from the State Run TV or people you know who work there,or from biased Thai newspapers.Please inform us.

Were you talking about Jon or Ji Ungpakorn? Jon was a senator and active campaigner on AIDS/human rights issues and not Marxist afaik, unlike his younger bro Comrade Professor Ji. Does this clear the confusion?

[dee123]

Jon Ungpakorn is asking for no-strings "FREE" media....TV similar to BBC and others,......all of the above are just political mouthpieces,....hence not "FREE"

Why doesn't he gather up his legions of supporters and believers and start up MTV (Marxist TeleVision) and thus create his own "free media"?

Is he a Marxist?...I don't know,but what I have read about the good he has done for the Insurance issue on AIDS patients,reporting of AIDS in the Press, the presure he put on giant pharmacetical companys to make cheap drugs available to the poor does not sound Marxist to me more like good causes by a decent man.Anyway its allways easy to paint someone "RED"or "Marxist"(Ken Livingston's previous nicknames) but you don't address the point he and I are making which is about how to ensure that the media in Thailand is impartial in politics.Have you any ideas you would like to share with us or are you happy the way things are?

I'm not painting him red, he's painting himself red...

"I'm a Marxist, and so are many friends in the party. We don't deny it. We're reviving the classic Marxism"

Mr. Ungpakorn / October 30, 2007

While it's a bit surprising you don't seem to know even some of the basic fundamental philosophies of someone you endorse, it doesn't mean that open media shouldn't be as free as possible.

To that end, it's a dramatic and very welcome change that the new government is not going to stifle DTV in the same manner that PTV was during the previous governments.

that Marxist quote, btw, was from your other personal endorsement...

I have just found this and I believe it would enlighten many Thais and also Farangs about some of the deep problems Thai society is facing at the moment www.prachatai.com

ok

Sriracha John I only know limited amount about John Ungpakorn,I admit...i am glad to here though you agree with me and him that public broadcasting is the way forward(that is what your saying isn't it?)Quote "free as possible" More importantly though please let us know where you get all your knowledge from, is it from the State Run TV or people you know who work there,or from biased Thai newspapers.Please inform us.

Were you talking about Jon or Ji Ungpakorn? Jon was a senator and active campaigner on AIDS/human rights issues and not Marxist afaik, unlike his younger bro Comrade Professor Ji. Does this clear the confusion?

don't ask me ask Sriracha John he told me Jon Ungapakorn was a Marxist and all I said was "is he",....so you will have to confirm that with him,....but don't be harsh on him (Sriracha John)as he is now my new found friend, he was one of the first members on Thaivisa.com that believes a public broadcasting system similar to BBC is the way forward for Thailand,....ain't that right John?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

let me think

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

hmmm?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

hey hold on a minute wasn't that an old trick the "Right Wing" British Press, used to do?? smear tactics,.?....eg RED Ken Livingstone Marxist ect.....if Labours Glenda Jackson gains power Marxists will take over the country,...ect......makes you think though let me try and get a grip on what Sriracha Jon is saying " I DO FAVOR ALL SORTS OF BROADCASTING"......NOPE STILL CAN'T SEE WHERE YOUR COMING FROM JOHN!....FREE BUT ALSO UN FREE? Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[Plus]

Giles (Ji) Ungpakorn is a self professed marxist nutcase with zero credibility.

His older brother Jon is a popular and respected former senator known for his dedication to work with real issues instead of endlessly yapping to foreign reporters.

Thai PBS is an attempt to create a BBC like service, with guaranteed financial independence.

[dee123]

Giles (Ji) Ungpakorn is a self professed marxist nutcase with zero credibility.

His older brother Jon is a popular and respected former senator known for his dedication to work with real issues instead of endlessly yapping to foreign reporters.

Thai PBS is an attempt to create a BBC like service, with guaranteed financial independence.

that is what I thought too,....but guys on here say different ....P.S. youv'e probably noticed Srirachajohn wriggling like a snake to avoid questions about his real position "AS FREE AS POSSIBLE" "I DO FAVOR ALL KINDS OF BROADCASTING"....So I try again ,....BBCish OR Thaksin/state media ish ?????? JOHN?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

Giles (Ji) Ungpakorn is a self professed marxist nutcase with zero credibility.

His older brother Jon is a popular and respected former senator known for his dedication to work with real issues instead of endlessly yapping to foreign reporters.

Thai PBS is an attempt to create a BBC like service, with guaranteed financial independence.

FREE OR NOT Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[hammered]

Jon Ungpakorn is asking for no-strings "FREE" media....TV similar to BBC and others,......all of the above are just political mouthpieces,....hence not "FREE"

Why doesn't he gather up his legions of supporters and believers and start up MTV (Marxist TeleVision) and thus create his own "free media"?

Is he a Marxist?...I don't know,but what I have read about the good he has done for the Insurance issue on AIDS patients,reporting of AIDS in the Press, the presure he put on giant pharmacetical companys to make cheap drugs available to the poor does not sound Marxist to me more like good causes by a decent man.Anyway its allways easy to paint someone "RED"or "Marxist"(Ken Livingston's previous nicknames) but you don't address the point he and I are making which is about how to ensure that the media in Thailand is impartial in politics.Have you any ideas you would like to share with us or are you happy the way things are?

I'm not painting him red, he's painting himself red...

"I'm a Marxist, and so are many friends in the party. We don't deny it. We're reviving the classic Marxism"

Mr. Ungpakorn / October 30, 2007

While it's a bit surprising you don't seem to know even some of the basic fundamental philosophies of someone you endorse, it doesn't mean that open media shouldn't be as free as possible.

To that end, it's a dramatic and very welcome change that the new government is not going to stifle DTV in the same manner that PTV was during the previous governments.

that Marxist quote, btw, was from your other personal endorsement...

I have just found this and I believe it would enlighten many Thais and also Farangs about some of the deep problems Thai society is facing at the moment www.prachatai.com

ok

Sriracha John I only know limited amount about John Ungpakorn,I admit...i am glad to here though you agree with me and him that public broadcasting is the way forward(that is what your saying isn't it?)Quote "free as possible" More importantly though please let us know where you get all your knowledge from, is it from the State Run TV or people you know who work there,or from biased Thai newspapers.Please inform us.

The whole media and freedom issue is a huge topic. Just a few thoughts:

Wasnt TPBS set up to be the Thai BBC?

No media outlet anywhere in the world is neutral and how that is judged tends to subjective based on ones own bias

There is no real freedom of the media

Worldwide over the past decade we have seen media become more politicised, more intimidated and more willing to follow the easy line. Journalism/media is in a state of decline in terms of quality, freedom etc worldwide.

Media is propoganda pure and simple

And taking all of the above I persoanlly choose to read and watch as many sources as I can and to talk to as many different people as I can about events. Persoanlluy I also like to read/view that which I dont agree with. However, that is I guess a minority position. Just try to keep as open minded as possible and maximise the number of diverse sources before making a judgement is all we can do.. We cannot expect a media source to do that for us. Being informed is more about what we do than accepting what any media outlet churns out. This is the age when not only cant you berlieve everything you are told/read but also the age when you cant beleive everything you see. Technology is a wonderful tool (for the propogandist)

All imho

[samgrowth]

TPBS was set up because the military govt / PAD wanted to ban ITV (ex-Thaksin).

All those BBC stuff are just crap. An excuess to justify the take over. Even my wife knew that.

[Plus]

To be called "free" the media is supposed to conform to liberal and democratic values.

Thai journalists, as much as the rest of the society, are neither liberal nor democratic, and I'm not sure that this is the best angle for them either.

Within reason, however, Thai PBS is as liberal and democratic as they come here, with roots coming from yet

untarnished 1992 uprising.

[dee123]

if the current guys(Ungpakorn) ect were not the ones setting up this BBC like station would that make a difference to you thaivisa members?would that make you happier?.........for is it not better to have at least one station that doesn't receive funding from private sources?..........does anyone here recognise the BBC system as "Marxist"?.........

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

Srirachajohn described Ungpakorns channel as Marxist,.....so if it were set-up by someone else but using BBC-ish philosophy you would all be able to say "yes thats better than it is at present".......right guys????? there seems to me to be some deliberate attempts to "muddy the water",but no positive ideas are put forward as how to improve the impartialality of Thai journalism but instead continue to only complain......eg "no media is free" "PBT is Marxist".....so just for me can everyone clarify that BBC ish(public owned media)is needed in Thailand or not, because at present they only hear what either the RED SHIRTS or the YELLOW SHIRTS are saying but they both cant be right hence a truly no strings public subsidised TV Channel would be a good idea. RIGHT GUYS?????? GOOD IDEA OR NOT?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[TAWP]

What on earth are you blabbing about?

Don't be fooled to think he would set up a BBC-like station, that is just silly. Would he create hos own tax-agency to pay for it too? That isn't what he means when he referrers to by 'free', it's more likely the notion of 'less control against what I wanna say', which is fine but it's not a 'fair and balanced' channel, just biased in another direction.

[Plus]

Dee, I can't make any sense out of your recent posts.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and I don't feel like explaining everything to you from the scratch - you seem to be happy to post and post and post without any knowledge on the subject, you don't need anyone's input.

[Journalist]

but anyway....OK, so no real verification from Jakob the Liar. I didn't respond to your earlier post because I was simply waiting for someone credible to verify his alleged illness. The "so widely reported" contradiction isn't really warranted if the original reports all eminent from Samak and his spokesman.

As for completeness, there's nothing "new-found" about it. My posting history is chock full of follow-ups and updates and varied sources on the same story. I'd go as far to say I'm unmatched in that regard. Sorry, but you'll have to bark up another tree or find a different angle.

If you found something in say, 'Oncology Quarterly' that verified that Samak had late stage cancer. Would you copy and paste it? I hope so.

Perhaps you need to re-assure your readers that you don't just copy and paste pieces that correlate with an Anti-Thaksin angle.

[bultaco44]

Giles (Ji) Ungpakorn is a self professed marxist nutcase with zero credibility.

His older brother Jon is a popular and respected former senator known for his dedication to work with real issues instead of endlessly yapping to foreign reporters.

Thai PBS is an attempt to create a BBC like service, with guaranteed financial independence.

To be called "free" the media is supposed to conform to liberal and democratic values.

Thai journalists, as much as the rest of the society, are neither liberal nor democratic, and I'm not sure that this is the best angle for them either.

Within reason, however, Thai PBS is as liberal and democratic as they come here, with roots coming from yet

untarnished 1992 uprising.

Dee, I can't make any sense out of your recent posts.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and I don't feel like explaining everything to you from the scratch - you seem to be happy to post and post and post without any knowledge on the subject, you don't need anyone's input.

G'day Plus

Thanks for explaining it all to me.

Now everything seems more simple.

Keep posting

[dee123]

What on earth are you blabbing about?

Don't be fooled to think he would set up a BBC-like station, that is just silly. Would he create hos own tax-agency to pay for it too? That isn't what he means when he referrers to by 'free', it's more likely the notion of 'less control against what I wanna say', which is fine but it's not a 'fair and balanced' channel, just biased in another direction.

ok you think its to complicated to sort the system to raise funds to set up a public broadcaster without sponsors or funding.Shame all you would have to do is read up on BBC'S funding policy and broadcasting standards.Then it would all become clear.It does not have to be Ungpakorn group it can be the new goverment who sets it up.

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

Dee, I can't make any sense out of your recent posts.

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and I don't feel like explaining everything to you from the scratch - you seem to be happy to post and post and post without any knowledge on the subject, you don't need anyone's input.

BBC TYPE BROADCASTER IN THAILAND GOOD IDEA OR NOT?........can u understand? or don't you want to answer?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[Journalist]

^No it isn't a good idea. Because BBC is funded by license payers money (i.e Joe Public - who have to fork out a hundred quid a year for a TV license)

As a funding model it doesn't merit replication in a country like Thailand. Few would buy a license. Even in the UK it is looking less viable long term. It made sense in the 1950s-1990s, pre-satellite days.

[dee123]

welcome to the debate and I agree with you journalist,that raising funds through a licence would be difficult...so could it be possible to get a lottery or tax system,(or a combination)in place to create a public broadcaster,(if you think a "peoples" TV is needed) as you know thai media is currently in a mess ....(PS at last a genuine honest reply! )

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[dee123]

...or is there enough info available via internet and satelite allready.....? cant the goverments block this?

Edited January 20, 2009 by dee123

[Journalist]

^With modern media, the age of the publicly-funded broadcaster is possibly gone forever.

Thats not to say examples can't be found of the medium, but its basic purpose is redundant. Plus putting together the nuts and bolts of a television operation isn't as hard as it was fifty years ago.

The BBC is governed by a Charter, one specific to its operations. This sets out the 'License Fee' that the public has to pay. This has long been a source of public controversy (and may not endure permanently).

It is state-owned, but is not an organ of state, and its relationship with government has been fraught on occasions. It is not a mouthpiece of the Government and sometimes pursues angles that are at odds with the authorities. Publicly funded broadcasters do have to tackle the accusation that they are subject to undue influence, and indeed it is tempting for Governments to try to meddle.

Publicly funded media is meant to operate at arms length from the Government - its not supposed to be a mouthpiece of a ruling party - (like "Pravda"), but the Government is a powerful partner in such arrangements given it stewards the terms of funding. And Governments usually love to influence where they can, especially with media issues.

Do I think a 'People's TV' is needed? ....Not really. I think the Press in Thailand do an okay job given their limited resources (their owners don't have bottomless pockets). In terms of undue influence, I think the situation has improved significantly from when Thaksin was acquiring stakes in the television companies. Yes, there are laws which muzzle debate locally, but with access (and its hard to block everything) to foreign media, issues can't be brushed under the carpet in any modern society nowadays.

Sixty years ago, the American people didn't know Roosevelt was to all intents and purposes wheelchaiir-bound, because the Press took care not to show the effects of his polio. That would not happen in this day and age.

Edited January 21, 2009 by Journalist

[Plus]

BBC TYPE BROADCASTER IN THAILAND GOOD IDEA OR NOT?

There's already Thai PBS, funded by the government, what's the point of discussing some other, hypothetical station?

[DaleBlue]

It would seem prudent for Sunisa to resign her commission. Then she can do whatever she wants unfettered. Militaries the world over have strict rules on what the commisioned and enlisted can do that always go beyond restrictions placed on civilians. That is the nature of militaries. Leave and proceed with a journalistic career in the Thaksin camp is probably a viable option for her. To stay in the military and break the rules is silly and may result in penalties that can be avoided by leaving. At best it becomes a mere political stunt and that is worrying as the red side have abandoned a few foot soldiers when they got themselves into trouble.

Stop the bully. Can you gentlemen out there stop picking on a defenseless poor girl. She is very harmless.

[hammered]

BBC TYPE BROADCASTER IN THAILAND GOOD IDEA OR NOT?

There's already Thai PBS, funded by the government, what's the point of discussing some other, hypothetical station?

I too find it odd that so many seem to have missed the whole debate on what to make of TPBS, and how to set it up with linked funds and to make it independent of government and commercial interests. Surely there must be an old thread on this that can be linked to for reference.

[Plus]

As I understand this new DTV station needs a special reception setup, same one as for ASTV. Are they really hoping to steal ASTV audience or expect their fans to dish out some money on the dishes?

Financially they can't support themselves by selling energy drinks and t-shirts and I doubt they can attract any advertisers either.

Maybe that's why the government is so ambivalent about them.

[dee123]

Thanks for the genuine replys,it is an important subject ,(press freedom/independentTV)...Today UK's channel 4 are looking for ways of funding to continue as an "independent" TV station.They have rejected suggested partnership with commercial Channel 5 so their independence is seen to remain in tact. Setting up a TV channel that is "pure" (if that were possible)requires many criteria having to be met.Finding means to finance can be problematic.News progammes on any network should really have a structure to ensure their impartialityCensorship and journalistic self censorship is a problem in Thailand.Current laws in Thailand have to be looked at again to enable freedom of press and speech.Many TV executives in UK say it is highly desirable to have more than one type of independent broadcaster(refering to Channel 4)who offer similar independence to the BBC through a different setup.

Edited January 22, 2009 by dee123

[Koo82]

"The charges are used against people who criticised the coup and disagree with the present destruction of democracy. They are used to create a climate of fear and censorship."

Posted by Ji Ungpakorn

[Plus]

That's Ji for you, not Jon.

Another red nutacase, Jaran, claims that the military plans to assassinate 25 red shirt leaders.

About time, me thinks.