Open Letter To Cnn International

[Garry9999]

Dear Sirs/Madams,

Recently, CNN Thailand Correspondents Dan Rivers and Sarah Snider have made me seriously reconsider your agency as a source for reliable and accurate unbiased news. As of this writing, over thousands of CNN’s viewers have already begun to question the accuracy and dependability of its reporting as regards events in Afghanistan, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, etc., in addition to Bangkok.

As a first-rate global news agency, CNN has an inherent professional duty to deliver all sides of the truth to the global public who have faithfully and sincerely placed their trust and reliance in you. Your news network, by its longtime transnational presence and extensive reach, has been put in a position of trust and care; CNN’s journalists, reporters, and researchers have a collective responsibility to follow the journalist's code and ethics to deliver and present facts from all facets of the story, not merely one-sided, shallow and sensational half-truths. The magnitude of harm or potential extent of damage that erroneous and fallacious news reporting can cause to (and exacerbate), not only a country’s internal state of affairs, economic well-being, and general international perception, but also the real lives and livelihood of the innocent and voiceless people of that nation, is enormous. CNN should not negligently discard its duty of care to the international populace by reporting single-sided or unverified facts and distorted truths drawn from superficial research, or display/distribute biased images which capture only one side of the actual event.

Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider have NOT done their best under these life-threatening circumstances because many other foreign correspondents have done better. All of Mr. Rivers and Ms. Sniders' quotes and statements seem to have been solely taken from the anti-government protest leaders or their followers/sympathizers. Yet, all details about the government’s position have come from secondary resources. No direct interviews with government officials have been shown; no interviews or witness statements from ordinary Bangkok residents or civilians unaffiliated with the protesters, particularly those who have been harassed by or suffered at the hands of the protesters, have been circulated.

Why the discrepancy in source of information? Why the failure to report all of the government’s previous numerous attempts to negotiate or invitations for protesters to go home? Why no broadcasts shown of the myriad ways the red protesters have terrorized and harmed innocent civilians by burning their shops, enclosing burning tyres around apartment buildings, shooting glass marbles at civilians from high altitudes, attacking civilians in their cars, and worst of all, obstructing paramedics and ambulances carrying civilians injured by M79 grenade blasts during the Silom incident of April 24, 2010, thereby resulting in the sole civilian casualty? The entire timeline of events that have forced the government to take this difficult stance has been hugely and callously ignored in deference to the red ‘underdogs’.

Mr. Rivers and Ms. Snider’s choice of sensational vocabulary and terminology in every newscast or news report, and choice of images to broadcast, has resulted in law-abiding soldiers and the heavily-pressured Thai government being painted in a negative, harsh, and oppressive light, whereas the genuinely violent and law-breaking arm of the anti-government protesters - who are directly responsible for overt acts of aggression not only against armed soldiers but also against helpless, unarmed civilians and law-abiding apolitical residents of this once blooming metropolis (and whose actions under American law would by now be classified as terrorist activities) – are portrayed as righteous freedom fighters deserving of worldwide sympathy and support. This has mislead the various international Human Rights watchdogs to believe the Thai government are sending trigger-happy soldiers out to ruthlessly murder unarmed civilians without just cause.

As a current resident of "war zone" Bangkok who has experienced the effect of the Red protests first hand and is living in a state of constant terror and anxiety as to whether her family, friends, and home would get bombed or attacked by the hardcore anti-government vigilantes/paramilitary forces - I appeal to CNN's professional integrity to critically investigate and scrutinize the misinformed news reporting of your above-named correspondents. If they are incapable of obtaining genuine, authentic facts from any other source except the Red Protest leaders and red-sympathizing Thai translators or acquaintances, or from fellow non-Thai-speaking journalists who are similarly ignorant of Thai language, culture, history, and society, then perhaps CNN should consider reassigning field correspondents to Thailand.

I implore and urge you to please take serious action to correct or reverse the grave injustice that has been done to the Thai nation, her government, and the majority of law-abiding Thai citizens and expatriate residents by having endorsed and widely circulated poorly researched and misrepresented news coverage of the current ongoing political unrest and escalating violence in Thailand.

Copies of this open letter have also been distributed to other local as well as international news media and social networks for public information. Please feel free to contact me further should you require any additional concrete and reputable evidence in substantiation and corroboration of my complaints and claims stated hereinabove.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Napas Na Pombejra, B.A., LL.B. (Lond.)

Bangkok, Thailand

May 17, 2010

http://www.eglobaltravelnews.com.au/2-head...ernational.html

[PhilHarries]

Well he could have equally cc'd the BBC and just about all the UK newpapers who have been equally biased in their reporting. Sometimes I wonder if their reporters ever made it out of Suvarnabhumi.

But nothing will change, the era of fair, unbiased news reporting has past. Now it's sound bites, front page celebrities, and dirt on leading public figures.

[IMA_FARANG]

Congratulations, excellant letter. Over the last few weeks I also have had occasion to criticise the objectivity of certain news organizations...CNN included...about their reporting of the news in Bangkok and Thailand.

One thing you must understand, however. CNN may be a news organization...but what they put on television in the U.S. is intended for a televison audiance that wants to see sensation over understanding. The televison business, and it is a business in the U.S. makes it's profit from the commercials that it sells in between shows, and news shows are included in that group. Therefore sensation, scenes of burning tires and such, have there segment of viewer who watch just for the spectacle. No desire for understanding there, just desire for some spectacle to watch. These are the same people who the commercials are pitched at.

For that reason, commercial sucess comes to those news organizations who sell commercial time on television...not those who promote understanding and fair news reporting.

A body or two bleeding in the street is sure to attract the mass audience for CNN...and that sells commercial time...for a profit.

So don't expect enlightened journalisim and deep analysis of events from CNN. No profit in that.

[DP25]

I appeal to CNN's professional integrity

That's your mistake. CNN is an entertainment agency. They are after ratings.

[NanLaew]

I could also type a long-winded circumlocution about my inner angst.

But I just switched to Al Jazeera instead.

Sorted!

When a 'news service' openly encourages <deleted> like CNN's I-reporter and the BBC's If you are in xxx and have experienced yyy, please email us at.... in lieu of experienced, qualified, unbiased on the ground reporting, they have already admitted to giving up truth to the ratings war.

[kaengk]

I don't know why the international press doesn't distribute the Abhisit govt PR. It seems illegal for them to have free-thinking reporters critically reporting what they see instead of what the poor Thai people and the world need to see. The government, well the Abhisit govt anyway, is the only political body which should distribute information. All of the international press is paid by Thaksin, only the military and government Thai news is correct. Why is this so difficult to get thru their thick skulls?

[Garry9999]

I don't know why the international press doesn't distribute the Abhisit govt PR. It seems illegal for them to have free-thinking reporters critically reporting what they see instead of what the poor Thai people and the world need to see. The government, well the Abhisit govt anyway, is the only political body which should distribute information. All of the international press is paid by Thaksin, only the military and government Thai news is correct. Why is this so difficult to get thru their thick skulls?

A point made by Somtow Sucharitkul here http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2905056.htm

When you watch a red shirt rally, notice how many English signs and placards there are, and note that they are designed to show that these are events conforming to the archetype. The placards say "Democracy", "No Violence," "Stop killing innocent women and children" and so on. Speakers are passionately orating, crowds are moved. But there are no subtitles. What does it look like?

The answer is obvious. It looks like oppressed masses demanding freedom from an evil dictator.

Don't blame Dan Rivers, et al, who are only doing what they are paid to do: find the compelling story within the mass of incomprehensible data, match that story to what the audience already knows and believes, and make sure the advertising money keeps flowing in.

A vigorous counter-propaganda campaign in clear and simple English words of one syllable has always been lacking and is the reason the government is losing the PR war while actually following the most logical steps toward a real and lasting resolution.

If the foreign press were in fact able to speak Thai well enough to follow all the reportage here coming from all sides, they would also be including some of the following information in their reports........................ http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2905056.htm

[misterjag]

When you consider that most of the Bangkok-based Thai news outlets are biased towards the Thai government and their elite supporters, I find it refreshing to get a different perspective from news sources like CNN.

Incidentally, I had the pleasure of chatting with Mr. Rivers between broadcasts during the first few hours of the 2006 Coup and found him to be thoroughly professional, unassuming and cordial.

[NanLaew]

^ What? This the same chap who uttered the following:

By the CNN Wire Staff Bangkok, Thailand (CNN) -- Bangkok, virtually unrecognizable after four days of clashes...

Maybe a nice chap between his live feeds but otherwise the jury is still out.

Edited May 21, 2010 by NanLaew

[Changian]

Bangkok Pundit has already disproved most of what the badly researched 'open letter' says. See his site for something far more constructive comments than the vast majority of TV posters can ever hope to offer.

Wonder how close a relation she is to Pojaman Na Pombejra ( aka the former Mrs Shinawatra )

[Starlifter]

In the U.S. (and perhaps elsewhere) there are so called reality shows which "go behind the scenes" to show how individuals make decisions. Examples such as tattoo parlors, restaurants etc. I've always said you will NEVER see a TRUE reality show of a news organization such as CNN, BBC etc. because it will show the true behind the scenes of discussions of how THEY want to shape the content they deliver to the viewer. Now I'm not saying 100% of the news is manipulated to fit someones (individual, individuals, corporations, politician) agenda more like 90 %. You must allow 10% for the puppy that is raising a cat type stories.

[phetaroi]

First, the best article I've read about this situation is this one from the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/world/asia/21bangkok.html

It outlines, better than I could myself, the fear I have for Thailand's future..and why I am pulling out of my retirement mode of life here. Back to the States.

It has been clear to me that much of the international media seems to be favoring (I first wrote "promoting", but decided that was too strong) the red shirt point of view. I don't think it's about ratings, because you can present the same exciting video, regardless of the side you're on.

I think it's more about a word that has become sacrosanct from the American point of view, and hence colors our views of almost any such crisis: democracy.

And that's nothing new. While it certainly didn't start with him, look back to JFK's inauguration speech: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." And oddly enough, I don't find that sentiment much different than the George Bush international policies a half century later...although George didn't express it as well.

I think that particularly in the States -- not sure about other western democracies -- that we see ourselves and our system as near perfection. It's not, of course, and maybe as some say it's merely the best -- albeit often imperfect -- of many governmental systems. But, we seem to think that every country's form of government -- and even form of democracy -- is less if it is not a mirror image of our own.

Although I disliked him very much, Mahathir from Malaysia put it very well very often when he would say (highly paraphrased): American democracy is not the only version of democracy, and it does not match well with every country.

The media helped demonize Suharto in Indonesia. And what happened to Indonesia after he was deposed? A degree of fracture of a society.

I don't care whether a particular Thai person is a hi-so, a yellow shirt, or a red shirt. Even as a second language, it's too easy to say the word "democracy". You have to have an understanding about what that word means and how a democracy can operate under various forms of government. Even Mr. Obama, who I supported, said something after the American election that I really disliked; in talking about some Democratic policy (and I think it may have been health care), he reminded Republicans he was addressing that they needed to remember that "we" (the Democrats) won. Bad. One of the things that I disliked about George Bush was that in my eyes he was the "President of the Republicans", not the "President of all the people of the United States". And I think that is what we see here in Thailand.

The Thais I have spoken to in the past couple of days are stunned, saddened, embarrassed, and worried. Thank god I haven't heard anyone say, "Mai pen rai". The question is will anything change?

I think the people in the provinces don't realize that over the last 25 years, their lives have improved considerably. And yet, I have often wondered how they feel when they come into Bangkok and see Central World and the other skyscrapers and Skytrain and MRT. The other day an image popped into my head from Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" -- the scene where the ghost from Christmas present (?) sweeps aside his garment two reveal two very poor children and reminds Scrooge that these two children -- (as I recall) poverty and ignorance -- are things we should fear. So should the Thais. Here it is the relative poverty and the disparity of lifestyles that cannot help feed future problems. When I ride (or rode) the Skytrain and would see the young Thais with their Blackberries, what I also saw was an attitude of "we have arrived!" They are the few.

Not long ago a Thai acquaintance said to me, "You don't understand Thai politics." If I were having that same conversation now, my response would be, "And after the last week in Bangkok, it's clear Thai people do not understand Thai politics either.

[Tim207]

One thing you must understand, however. CNN may be a news organization...but what they put on television in the U.S. is intended for a televison audiance that wants to see sensation over understanding. The televison business, and it is a business in the U.S. makes it's profit from the commercials that it sells in between shows, and news shows are included in that group.

Umm, why are you blaming US audience preference for how CNN INTERNATIONAL reports? I guess your opinions on US viewers need to be expanded to include the English speaking world outside of the US because CNN INTERNATIONAL is not the same CNN commonly watched in the US. It is aimed at those outside the US.

[Carib]

CNN has put up another "great" misinformation vid, how stupid can these people be.,

[carmine]

When you consider that most of the Bangkok-based Thai news outlets are biased towards the Thai government and their elite supporters, I find it refreshing to get a different perspective from news sources like CNN.

Incidentally, I had the pleasure of chatting with Mr. Rivers between broadcasts during the first few hours of the 2006 Coup and found him to be thoroughly professional, unassuming and cordial.

You found it refreshing to get a totally innacurate slanted coverage fron CNN did you? Well you are a one arn't you.....

[kmj]

Ha Ha, news channels / news papers are great until they say / print something that you don't like... I don't understand why people are suprised, do you think they just started this sensationalist policy for the Thai conflict? Maybe a letter to some Thailand national press may also be in order.

[Abrak]

I don't know why the international press doesn't distribute the Abhisit govt PR. It seems illegal for them to have free-thinking reporters critically reporting what they see instead of what the poor Thai people and the world need to see. The government, well the Abhisit govt anyway, is the only political body which should distribute information. All of the international press is paid by Thaksin, only the military and government Thai news is correct. Why is this so difficult to get thru their thick skulls?

Exactly, they should remove CNN and BBC off UBC.

The letter is totally inaccurate BTW. On Wednesday, Korn Chatikavanij was interviewed at least twice on CNN and the Governor of Bangkok, Sukhumbhand Paribatra, was also interviewed. Rather strangely, the Thai TV doesnt really do interviews presumably because journalists (under the pay of Thaksin) would ask bias questions and possibly make derogatory accusations. So they realize that a clear, accurate and unbiased view is best served by public service announcements either by 'military/government' spokesmen or by the Prime Minister.

To be honest, independent news channels simply feel sorry for letters coming from residents of countries, complaining of bias when their domestic press and TV is not free and subject to censorship.

[seahorse]

A point made by Somtow Sucharitkul here http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2905056.htm

When you watch a red shirt rally, notice how many English signs and placards there are, and note that they are designed to show that these are events conforming to the archetype. The placards say "Democracy", "No Violence," "Stop killing innocent women and children" and so on. Speakers are passionately orating, crowds are moved. But there are no subtitles. What does it look like?

The answer is obvious. It looks like oppressed masses demanding freedom from an evil dictator.

Excellent article. Thank you for posting.