Thai Democracy Suffers When We Hear What We Want To Hear

[webfact]

THAI TALK

Democracy suffers when we hear what we want to hear

By Suthichai Yoon

PERHAPS it's a bit late for Premier Abhisit Vejjajiva to declare his readiness to allocate a time slot on government-run Channel 11 for the opposition to air its views to the public.

For one thing, Pheu Thai Party leaders may now find that appearing on the official channel, no matter what they say, is a softening of a hard stand they are supposed to take. For another, a simmering battle for the right to be the official opposition leader - which has been left vacant since this government took office over a year ago - may erupt. Rightly or wrongly, that could be interpreted as a vicious attempt on the part of the government to subvert the opposition.

The real reason for the opposition's lack of enthusiasm to be seen on Channel 11, however, is probably more down-to-earth: They don't need a state-run media outlet to reach out to their own supporters when they already have their own 24-hour news station that presents nothing but their own version of the "facts".

If Channel 11 tells you what the government wants you to know, then the "red" station gives you everything you need to know about what's wrong with the government - lock, stock and barrel, unabridged and at full throttle.

In fact, for any opposition chief or red-shirt leader to agree to speak on the government station would now sound too tame and formal. They might not be able to win the hearts and minds of those determined to see the end of the Abhisit's administration.

What I have come to call "militant journalism" - practised by both the yellow and red camps - has been employed by rival parties in this running political conflict to communicate directly with followers. Objectivity and impartiality - or the standard practice of providing the public with various versions of a story and all sides of an argument - simply aren't considered part of the policy of the partisan media that has flooded the market over the past few years.

The premier seemed well aware of that trend when he said in his speech to mark the 22nd anniversary of the founding of Channel 11 last Friday: "I believe we can all predict what television channel a certain person normally watches if you know which daily newspaper he reads - and you can also tell which website he will check for news and views. And for him, 'the set of facts' on a particular situation in the country would be totally different for another person who reads another newspaper, watches another TV channel and follows a different website."

As a result, it is becomingly increasingly rare and difficult for those two citizens to agree on anything. They follow news and arguments from separate media sources - sources that tend to confirm their thinking and convictions rather than exposing them to divergent views.

In other words, the worrisome trend in a significant segment of Thai society is that citizens, especially those trapped in a confrontational mode, will watch what they want to see, peruse what they want to read and listen to what they want to hear.

Abhisit said part of his media reform plan would be to push for the return to the "golden age" when those with opposing views could use the same radio and television stations to communicate with the public. This, he said, should replace what he sees as a "very sensitive trend" in which some media only reflect one side of the story, turning them into political propaganda tools rather than serving as mass media.

It's a sad state of affairs when everyone simply wants to read what he feels comfortable with, and watch programmes that only confirm his political thinking.

But if you trace the story back just a few years, that trend began when Thaksin Shinawatra took over ITV and his government turned Channel 11 into a full-blown government propaganda machine.

Sad to say, the Abhisit government has changed nothing in that respect because every politician seems to think the same way: If you keep telling the same stories, day in day out, on TV and radio, the people will think they are true.

Now, the yellow, red and blue stations are all following the Channel 11 model: Give them nothing else but your version of the story. Do it long enough and they won't watch or listen to anything else.

That, to me, is how this country's growing divisiveness all began - and how Thai "democracy" was hijacked from the rest of us.

-- The Nation 2010-07-15

[rkidlad]

Do the writers at the nation fully understand what they are writing?

They're constantly contradicting themselves and writing absolute drivel. The Nation prints what it wants people to read!!! I find it insulting that they really think foreigners are so stupid that we don't understand the concept of 'propaganda'!

Print your newspaper in Thai. You make 'The Sun' newspaper look like the Gospel!

P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!

Edited July 15, 2010 by rkidlad

[Siripon]

Sutichai Yoon's right, the emergence of ASTV and the red shirts People Channel, coupled with the massive increase in community radio stations, has led to polarisation as none of these media channels are interested in objectivity or balanced reporting.

Apart from education, individuals must be prepared to sue these outlets when they broadcast plain lies and incite hatred, and the owners need to face jail time and have their licences revoked.

[jayjay0]

Do the writers at the nation fully understand what they are writing?

They're constantly contradicting themselves and writing absolute drivel. The Nation prints what it wants people to read!!! I find it insulting that they really think foreigners are so stupid that we don't understand the concept of 'propaganda'!

Print your newspaper in Thai. You make 'The Sun' newspaper look like the Gospel!

P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!

You make no sense writing contradicting points of view is what balanced journalism is. Yet you take obsession to them when they do. Best you stick with your one channel and one corresponding newspaper.

I am in no way endorsing the Nation but they at least try. DO YOUR SOURCES?

[Rucharee]

Sad to say, the Abhisit government has changed nothing in that respect because every politician seems to think the same way: If you keep telling the same stories, day in day out, on TV and radio, the people will think they are true.

Now, the yellow, red and blue stations are all following the Channel 11 model: Give them nothing else but your version of the story. Do it long enough and they won't watch or listen to anything else.

Need not say more.

[gregb]

I have always found Suthichai Yoon to be one of the most level headed editorial writers in Thailand, let alone at The Nation.

He is very correct here as well, but like all truly honest comments on the current division, shows us a predicament with no solution. Khun Abhisit can try all he wants to engage the other side in meaningful dialog, but nobody is listening. Nobody in the polarized society wants to hear the other side of the story, so there is no market for a station that is unbiased. And because there is no market for it, it will not happen. And if it is forced to happen, it will be ignored.

But does anyone have a solution to this problem short of a bloody civil war or crackdown that will last a generation? If they do that will be an editorial worth reading.

[scorecard]

Do the writers at the nation fully understand what they are writing?

They're constantly contradicting themselves and writing absolute drivel. The Nation prints what it wants people to read!!! I find it insulting that they really think foreigners are so stupid that we don't understand the concept of 'propaganda'!

Print your newspaper in Thai. You make 'The Sun' newspaper look like the Gospel!

P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!

Many items in newspapers are reports of what other people have said. it's obvious that there will be conflict accross what the 'other people' have said. Is that the fault of the newspaper? Of course not.

Or perhaps your suggesting that if there is concfict across two reports, of what other people have said, then the newspaper should change the stories so that they are consistent?

By the way, what do you mean by your comment: "P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!"

Edited July 15, 2010 by webfact
Quote fixed

[scorecard]

I have always found Suthichai Yoon to be one of the most level headed editorial writers in Thailand, let alone at The Nation.

He is very correct here as well, but like all truly honest comments on the current division, shows us a predicament with no solution. Khun Abhisit can try all he wants to engage the other side in meaningful dialog, but nobody is listening. Nobody in the polarized society wants to hear the other side of the story, so there is no market for a station that is unbiased. And because there is no market for it, it will not happen. And if it is forced to happen, it will be ignored.

But does anyone have a solution to this problem short of a bloody civil war or crackdown that will last a generation? If they do that will be an editorial worth reading.

I agree that Sutichai Yoon is a good journalist and commentator.

I'm not sure that I agre that 'nobody is listening'. Would you like to share some further thoughts on this comment.

[gregb]

I have always found Suthichai Yoon to be one of the most level headed editorial writers in Thailand, let alone at The Nation.

He is very correct here as well, but like all truly honest comments on the current division, shows us a predicament with no solution. Khun Abhisit can try all he wants to engage the other side in meaningful dialog, but nobody is listening. Nobody in the polarized society wants to hear the other side of the story, so there is no market for a station that is unbiased. And because there is no market for it, it will not happen. And if it is forced to happen, it will be ignored.

But does anyone have a solution to this problem short of a bloody civil war or crackdown that will last a generation? If they do that will be an editorial worth reading.

I agree that Sutichai Yoon is a good journalist and commentator.

I'm not sure that I agre that 'nobody is listening'. Would you like to share some further thoughts on this comment.

I have no more thoughts. I honestly do not think there is any result possible short of civil war or a 20 year military clampdown. The reds will not accept anything less than the return of Thaksin and the anti reds will die in the streets before they allow this. And nobody is neutral on the issue of Thaksin according to every poll ever conducted in Thailand. All the other issues could be negotiated, but the Thaksin problem is intractable.

I would be curious to hear any honest views on a practical way out. I believe it is futile. I do not believe anyone is listening because there is no point in listening. There is no answer to the intractable problem.

[eggomaniac]

It's great to see a Thai publishing comments which get close to the roots of The Kingdom of Thailand's discord and violence, the conflicting mindset of the reds and yellows. An all out win by either side will be a total loss for Thailand because the leaders on both are criminals who go as far as terrorism to get their hands on the levers of corruption.

However, khun Suthichai would have to educate me on when Thailand ever had wholesome democracy? A stalemate of opposing evil forces in a swamp seems like a better description than a "hijacking" of a freedom train. The democracy train has never existed. After all, only one PM has ever lasted a full term and only one other PM came from humble beginings and was 'relatively' corruption free, if you don't count his brother and his Cabinet Ministers. Thailand has been suffering for nearly 9 decades from a weird Western political lab experiment the opposing camps of the Khana Ratsadon foisted upon them. How was a communist & facist Group ever going to have a chance at success, except to open the doors to a succession of 'get very, very rich' politicians.

=============================================================================

Still, pointing out that the whole problem with Thailand is the struggle between the Government/yellows and the reds can only serve to enlighten. After the next election, if it 'somehow' comes off without all out civil war, we will then be looking at a Government/red versus yellow conflict, anon.

If they were not so pig headed, they would notice how small the pig trough is getting and, like in the Past, call a gang land truce to divvy up the apples, while fooling everybody it is 'democracy'.

It's NOT surprising polls showed a 24% approval rating for Abhisit because he is NOT making the moves outlined in The Joseph Solution which would satisfy The Mute Majority, the 80+% of Thais who are not Yellow OR Red!

[xenomorph]

This is probably true...

During the Red Shirt's destruction orgy in Bangkok, many posters here in Thai Visa forum also suffered from the "I hear what I want to hear" symptom. So this is not only a 3rd world and poor education issue. Like supporting the football team no matter how bad they are performing. It's like a belief. Almost religious. The more someone says you're on the wrong side. The more you probably raise your guard. Admitting you're on the wrong side, will cost you both a lot of prestige and a lot of personal belief in yourself.

Given Truth, the Misinformed Believe Lies More

In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that misinformed people, particularly political partisans, rarely changed their minds when exposed to corrected facts in news stories. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

Read the article here:

Exposed to Facts, the Misinformed Believe Lies More Strongly

.

Edited July 15, 2010 by xenomorph

[ozzieovaseas]

Democracy suffers when we hear what we want to hear....

<deleted>??

not only in politics.....we also hear of various:

crackdowns

hubs

reports of tourists flocking back

reports of Thai exports and economy on the rise, despite global turmoil....ect ect

not to mention hansum man..

when have we NOT heard what we want to hear in LOS

[Thai at Heart]

One can hardly say that the powers that be haven't brought this on themselves with until recent years either the government or the armed forces having their greedy little fingers in just about all of the TV and many of the radio channels.

People have woken up to the fact that the news media here in Thailand is largely controlled by the government and army. The paternalistic attitude to providing information coupled with the idea of not causing controversy or wanting the empower the populous has given rise to the Foxnewsisation of the yellows and reds TV stations along with local radio. there is a logical distrust of the media when the overwhelming majority of it continually parrots the government line.

The endless compliance of the media to not challenge government, in conjunction with extremely strict libel laws has prevented the media from challenging the establishment and allowing information to flow out into public. Whilst not saying that the Western media cannot be influenced by the governments of their time, but the freedom to investigate, challenge and possibly hold to public account exercised by Western media is a vital part of democracy.

One only needs to see the knots that Thai politicians have tied themselves in when addressed by western media to understand that they are given a very easy ride at home by the media.

[eggomaniac]

I have always found Suthichai Yoon to be one of the most level headed editorial writers in Thailand, let alone at The Nation.

He is very correct here as well, but like all truly honest comments on the current division, shows us a predicament with no solution. Khun Abhisit can try all he wants to engage the other side in meaningful dialog, but nobody is listening. Nobody in the polarized society wants to hear the other side of the story, so there is no market for a station that is unbiased. And because there is no market for it, it will not happen. And if it is forced to happen, it will be ignored.

But does anyone have a solution to this problem short of a bloody civil war or crackdown that will last a generation? If they do that will be an editorial worth reading.

I agree that Sutichai Yoon is a good journalist and commentator.

I'm not sure that I agre that 'nobody is listening'. Would you like to share some further thoughts on this comment.

I have no more thoughts. I honestly do not think there is any result possible short of civil war or a 20 year military clampdown. The reds will not accept anything less than the return of Thaksin and the anti reds will die in the streets before they allow this. And nobody is neutral on the issue of Thaksin according to every poll ever conducted in Thailand. All the other issues could be negotiated, but the Thaksin problem is intractable.

I would be curious to hear any honest views on a practical way out. I believe it is futile. I do not believe anyone is listening because there is no point in listening. There is no answer to the intractable problem.

Scorecard, it is 'almost' totally futile. I actually visited Thai academics and The King Prajadhipok's Institute this past Dec/Jan to try to GIVE them remedies that would have derailed the red tidal wave. There ARE measures that could be taken whereby Thaksin AND Sondhi would cooperate in dismantling the red and yellow movements and by which they would BOTH accept their punishment and strict auditing of their business interests and bans from being involved in politics, truly there is.

If I could get Khun Chuan, Professor Thitinan and a Few Others on my list, including a famous Canadian mediator, in the rooms of the KPI for a few days, The Kingdom Of Thailand would be a G30 Nation within 5 years.

Sadly, your prediction of a Burmese NKorean style outcome is mild compared to what is really around the next couple of corners.

I'm making my retirement plans on the Cambodian Island of Ko Chang. Anything South of NST, the Muslims are coiling to take.

The way the system has been developed, there just are not any corruption free people of influence.

If somebody could unleash, give voice to The Insipid Majority and run the yellows and reds, BOTH, into the ditch.

The White Shirts would NOT be like the Khana Ratsadon, the yellows, OR the reds: they would be a GROUP that wants to bring sanity and an architecture, yes, The Joseph Solution, into place. They would NOT be setting themselves up to run for election into the seats of corruption, they would work with ALL to set up system that ensured fair elections, stable 4 year Terms AND a "built in", automatic filtering out of bribery and conflict of interest by politicians.

This could be mandated with MONTHS, instead of the reADiculous, 3 year committees, gravy trains they set up.

Police and military corruption would be a more difficult 'problem' and take longer, an adjustment period, but there is NO reason the politics canNOT be set right QUICKLY.

====================================

Seeing a Thai writer, pointing at the trouble makers, the causers of the problems, the red AND yellows, blows a wind of hope against the hurricane of 'futility' of the situation.

Can Suthichai Yoon suffer to expound more along these lines?

Edited July 15, 2010 by eggomaniac

[Siripon]

The problem will persist until Thaksin is either penniless or lifeless. Once the red shirts have to let go of their saviour, financially or emotionally, the country will be freer to move on without constant attempts to drag thailand down, as Thaksin has been doing.

[rkidlad]

Do the writers at the nation fully understand what they are writing?

They're constantly contradicting themselves and writing absolute drivel. The Nation prints what it wants people to read!!! I find it insulting that they really think foreigners are so stupid that we don't understand the concept of 'propaganda'!

Print your newspaper in Thai. You make 'The Sun' newspaper look like the Gospel!

P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!

You make no sense writing contradicting points of view is what balanced journalism is. Yet you take obsession to them when they do. Best you stick with your one channel and one corresponding newspaper.

I am in no way endorsing the Nation but they at least try. DO YOUR SOURCES?

I assume you're a moderator so your nose is firmly up 'The Nation's' proverbial. Writing conflicting reports is what balanced journalism is?

Newspapaers usually pick a side. So for the nation they've obviously chosen the yellows. Some nation journalists are very pro yellow and some are moderate. But by no means be mistaken that they're yellow. So when you write a stupid report saying that the reds are writing pro red material and the blues are doing the same; you may as well admit you do it yourself. And when you pretend to be holier than thou, and someone with half a brain can see that you're not, you look stupid!

I am glad to see that you're allowing people to critisise th nation and not deleting their blogs anymore for pointing out their constantly 'imbalanced' jornalism.

Now do you understand my point? This article is patronising. Maybe you've been here so long you're immune to being patronised.

I can't beleive you're defending the nation and saying the jounlism is balanced. They try? They try what? To spell and grammar check their articles?

[rkidlad]

Do the writers at the nation fully understand what they are writing?

They're constantly contradicting themselves and writing absolute drivel. The Nation prints what it wants people to read!!! I find it insulting that they really think foreigners are so stupid that we don't understand the concept of 'propaganda'!

Print your newspaper in Thai. You make 'The Sun' newspaper look like the Gospel!

P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!

Many items in newspapers are reports of what other people have said. it's obvious that there will be conflict accross what the 'other people' have said. Is that the fault of the newspaper? Of course not.

Or perhaps your suggesting that if there is concfict across two reports, of what other people have said, then the newspaper should change the stories so that they are consistent?

By the way, what do you mean by your comment: "P.s Sort out your script, Thaivisa!"

Nope. I don't mean that at all. Go back and read it properly.

HTML script. That's what I meant.

[chainarong]

Democracy is not just one person one vote ,it has to be earned, you also have freedom of speech, which you don't have, a high education standard ,which you don't have , but hel_l I like the title, i think that about sums it all up in one tight package,Thai Democracy , maybe this a variation of democracy.

[garrfeild]

Having read the posts on this subject, I wonder how you all feel this effects your living here in Thailand. will you be going on the demos next time the red or yellow shirt's start it up again.

[jayjay0]

This is probably true...

During the Red Shirt's destruction orgy in Bangkok, many posters here in Thai Visa forum also suffered from the "I hear what I want to hear" symptom. So this is not only a 3rd world and poor education issue. Like supporting the football team no matter how bad they are performing. It's like a belief. Almost religious. The more someone says you're on the wrong side. The more you probably raise your guard. Admitting you're on the wrong side, will cost you both a lot of prestige and a lot of personal belief in yourself.

Given Truth, the Misinformed Believe Lies More

In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that misinformed people, particularly political partisans, rarely changed their minds when exposed to corrected facts in news stories. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

Read the article here:

Exposed to Facts, the Misinformed Believe Lies More Strongly

.

Here is a quote from the next paragraph in that article.

" And in the presence of the correct information, such people react very, very differently than the merely uninformed."

In the case of the red shirts they are uninformed of what democracy is. If they understood democracy they would react very differently. They might hold to there believe in there leaders but they would not hold to the belief that to try to physically inflict there will on others would be OK. They would know the power they have if they inform there ministers of what they want by letters and phone calls.

The first job a elected official has is to make sure he gets reelected and if enough of the voters tell him they are unhappy with him he will listen. That is democracy at work. Unfortunately that is not what the red shirt leaders teach. They teach if it is not my way it is wrong and I have the rite to destroy property invade hospitals and deprive honest citizens of there livelihood. They in fact practice Anarchy.

Yes it is not easy to admit you are wrong. I myself was behind the red shirts at first. After a week I took a better look at what they were doing and started o have doubts. On April 19 when they resisted disbanding with guns I knew they were not for me. There continued refusel to negotiate showed them for the Anarchists that they are.

Edited July 15, 2010 by jayjay0