Although I rarely watch Thai tv, since the fooding started I've been watching some news programmes to try and keep up with what's happening, and I've noticed that the amount of actual flooding footage is quite small compared to the amount of time given to seeing the frontspeople chat between themselves.

I'm wondering if they don't realise that they can show actual news footage and talk at the same time!

Even if they do show some real live news clips, it's often only half screen or less, with the frontspeople thrusting themselves into the screen.

As for the news clips themselves, often the same 30 seconds repeated ad nauseam. There must be thousands of hours of footage being sent to the studios, and they show about five to ten original minutes in half an hour.

And, another thing, they assume everyone in the whole country knows where they are talking about. Never a map detailing where the floods are, or likely to be. No wonder people always seem to be taken by surprise when their house floods!

In comparison, Al Jazeera had the best news coverage I've ever seen on the Cairo uprising. Never a frontsperson to be seen pushing themselves into the spotlight at the expense of the story. Overall, they give very good visual coverage for all their news stories. Sadly, channels like the BBC, which should be as good, are almost as pants as Thai tv news. They could all learn from Al Jazeera.

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Good one.

In that case, Thai mainstream tv news must be the cheapest in the world!

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Yeah, for a similar reason in the US many of the TV programs are crap "reality" shows. Real programs cost much more to produce.

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Just six words and it makes perfect sense.

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Just six words and it makes perfect sense.

Now to spin it the other way one could say "Sorry for the lack of footage as our helicopter is being used for distribution of aid to people who have been affected by this terrible disaster - so please bear with us as we chat amongst ourselves."

Thaibeachlover i thought u wanted to go out and help??

Don maung....You can go there and help pack things instead of watching tv

Dont worry about a work permit its not needed.

i always find the array of annoying adverts in the back , and always popping up in the corner of the screen more annoying !

Because as similar to the United States, Thailand has become a commercial society.

Sponsors and those who run the shows are given priority airtime and whatever is the programme theme or news items they are meant to be covering becomes secondary.

One way or another we are going to pay. Whether it is through having to endure all the ads and in your face sponsorship banter via the so call free terrestrial channels or paying a monthly fee for more palatable programmes on the satellite and cable networks.

The only other alternative to this is something like the UK BBC system where everyone by law has to pay yearly TV license fee.

So in other words, we only get what we pay for.

The good old days of quality before profits have long gone.

May be they speak in Thai about where the flood is and etc?

Put a Thai in front of a camera or give them a microphone and they can talk for ages without a script, not having a go just an observation, see it in shops all the time with the microphone. Amazing, but the same clips put on auto repeat is annoying, maps would be useful to as mentioned, still there you go, all be over soon and we will be able to get out more

Same-same for this profession the world over.

The archetype is a character from an old US tv show named Ted Baxter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Baxter

People in that profession insult one another with comparisons to Ted (eg Limbaugh says it of O'Reilly).

Thaibeachlover i thought u wanted to go out and help??

Don maung....You can go there and help pack things instead of watching tv

Dont worry about a work permit its not needed.

Yes I'd like to help, but for very good reasons ( which are nobody else's business ) I am unable to do so at this time.

Anyway, the floods and the aftermath will be there for a very long time, so there's no rush.

Footage costs money-talk is cheap.

Your reply is good and no doubt true, but it doesn't cover <Even if they do show some real live news clips, it's often only half screen or less, with the frontspeople thrusting themselves into the screen>

The footage is being shown, so it's paid for, but why do we have to see the frontsperson's mug taking up half or more of the screen?

They always have interviews with a microphone, I ask myself why because you Never hear the interview.

They always have interviews with a microphone, I ask myself why because you Never hear the interview.

IMO you can hear the interviewee answering, but you can not hear the questions asked by the interviewer.

They always have interviews with a microphone, I ask myself why because you Never hear the interview.

IMO you can hear the interviewee answering, but you can not hear the questions asked by the interviewer.

I teach a unit on journalism for TV broadcast in my Thai university classes. We skipped the unit "microphone handling," assuming common sense might prevail here. My apologies.