Thai Media Unity In Peril As Founding Member Matichon Quits Council

[webfact]

ANALYSIS

Media unity in peril as founding member Matichon quits council

By Tulsathit Taptim

The Nation

The irony is that during the last days of Thaksin Shinawatra's controversial reign, the Thai media were united. Or at least they agreed on the definition of "political interference".

Remnants of the campaign against him can still be seen today, though it's safe to say that some reporters still wearing T-shirts with a "Stop intimidating the media" slogan no longer intend to send any political message.

Today, everyone has his own interpretation of "political interference". That is a relatively minor problem, though. Matichon group's decision to pull out of the Press Council of Thailand, of which the media camp was a founding member, confirmed that bigger trouble lies ahead. The Thai media seem to be breaking apart just at the time when Thaksin is pushing for a comeback.

For a while now, the media have been far from united. Newspapers have taken polar political positions and digital media groups big and small have sprung up to fight for one side or the other. Having been heavily involved in politics, media organisations have walked into the same trap that many others had fallen into before them. No uniform ethical standards exist anymore. Our own questionable acts are necessary, while similar deeds committed by others are dead wrong.

Exposing weak points

One intercepted e-mail - purportedly written by a Pheu Thai junior lobbyist to a party big gun - claiming that "helpful" journalists were being rewarded, was enough to expose all the media's weak points. Most of all, it has struck at the heart of the proud though questionable tradition of self-supervision.

Matichon was upset at the Press Council of Thailand's investigation into the e-mail affair. Although the council's fact-finding committee concluded that there was no evidence of anyone receiving Pheu Thai bribes, the panel embarrassed quite a few people by giving out details of what it suggested was lopsided pre-election coverage. In other words, the investigating panel was wondering out loud why Yingluck Shinawatra was given sympathetic or even favourable headlines while Abhisit Vejjajiva was always treated satirically.

The panel did not pinpoint any bribery, but it strongly implied outside interference. Matichon and its supporters argued that it was the panel and the press council themselves that were under political influence. After a few days of lashing out at the investigation results and the press council, Matichon took the dramatic step yesterday. The press council, Matichon's resignation letter said, had allowed itself to be politicised, leading to victimisation of its own founding members.

This could be the beginning of the end, tweeted Duangkamol Chotana, president of Krungthep Turakij who was involved with the press council for years. "This issue homes in on the media's most vulnerable spot - their long-standing attempt at self-supervision," she said.

Is Matichon rejecting the virtue of self-supervision? Or is it just protesting politicisation of the self-supervisory body? Perhaps most ironic of all, politics is making it hard to answer these two questions, because politics can make you think one way or the other. And politics makes sure that, when you ponder what's really going on, the "trap" remains wide open.

-- The Nation 2011-09-08