Media Watchers Want iTV Back In Thai Hands

[Jai Dee]

Media watchers want iTV back in Thai hands

Fearing the influence of a foreign government on the Thai public, media-watchers are calling for Singaporean-owned Temasek Holdings to sell iTV and Shin Satellite back to Thai owners.

“Mass media, and especially television, has a great influence on people,” Surat Metheekul, a Thammasat University professor who heads the Council of Mass Communication Faculty Members of Thailand, said in an interview yesterday. “Having these assets is important for our national benefit.”

Temasek Holdings, a Singapore government investment fund, purchased iTV and Shin Satellite in its 73.3-billion-baht acquisition of 49.6 percent of Shin Corporation. The company was most interested in buying leading mobile phone operator AIS, but has said it will retain ownership of iTV and Shin Satellite.

“Of course the Thai public should worry,” said Supinya Klangnarong, secretary-general of the Campaign for Popular Media Reform.

“These assets are the most important infrastructure for an information society. Temasek is controlled by the Singapore government, which means another government could dominate Thai television. And I don’t think they would allow the freedom of expression that would benefit the Thai public.”

Though critics have worries that Temasek’s acquisition of Shin violates foreign ownership rules regarding telecommunications assets, attention has focused on the status of iTV and Shin Satellite. Temasek has described them as “immaterial assets” and has not indicated its plans for the subsidiaries.

More so than Shin Satellite, iTV holds sentimental value for many Thai democracy advocates. The station was born out of the May 1992 political uprising that claimed hundreds of lives and the military dictatorship of General Suchinda Kraprayoon.

During the week of bloodshed, the five state-run television stations did not cover the massive protests. The more sophisticated Bangkok middle class demanded media outlets that reflected their voices of dissent.

The original concept for iTV, which launched in 1997, involved 10 companies owning 10 percent of the station. The content was intended to be 70-percent news and documentaries, and 30-percent entertainment.

Though the station provided socially responsible news content in its first few years, it began bleeding money. The prime minister’s office lifted the 10-percent ownership rules due to the station’s mounting debts, and in 2000 Shin Corp increased its stake in the company to 39 percent.

After Shin took a controlling stake, iTV underwent an editorial transformation that saw more than 20 journalists lose their jobs. Critics say the once independent station has become coopted by the government.

Now that iTV is controlled by Temasek Holdings, activists are hoping to organize a buyout and restore the original format of the station. They want more news, less entertainment and absolutely no political influence – be it foreign or domestic – over a station that was conceived to be a government watchdog.

Rumors have spread that GMM Grammy, the country’s largest media company, may be looking to acquire iTV. But activists said that an acquisition by GMM would likely be met with the same backlash that accompanied its share purchases in Post Publishing and Matichon last year.

“The Thai public should buy back iTV according to the original idea,” Supinya said. “If GMM bought iTV, of course the Thai public would not be happy. We need the 10-percent rule to ensure checks and balances, but we need to find companies that are not politically connected.”

Some academics and lawmakers have raised fears that anti-Singaporean sentiment would grow if Temasek refused to sell Shin Satellite and iTV back to Thai owners. But Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra stated initially that his family sold Shin to Temasek because he could not find a Thai buyer.

“Singapore could have a problem only if the Democrats play the nationalism card and make it a big deal,” said a foreign diplomat.

“The whole worry about national security is a bit goofy since the satellite can’t be used for spying. It depends if the politicians really want to create a conspiracy theory.”

Some academics have rejected comparisons to Telenor’s buyout of DTAC late last year, arguing that Shin Corp acted as a de facto government enterprise since it benefited so much from government policy.

DTAC, on the other hand, was not involved in politics and was constantly fighting regulatory decisions and AIS for more market share, said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political scientist at Chulalongkorn University.

“iTV is now owned by a foreign company, and the Thai public should buy it back with the spirit of May 1992 in mind to set it up as a public company,” he said. “Either way, Temasek needs to clarify its plans and intentions with Shin Satellite and iTV.”

Source: ThaiDay - 8 February 2006 15:06

[britainmal]

Fearing the influence of a foreign government on the Thai public, media-watchers are calling for Singaporean-owned Temasek Holdings to sell iTV and Shin Satellite back to Thai owners.

Fear foreign influence or Should They be fearing The Thai Powerful Elite that wants protection, so they can sit down and watch their wealth capitalize easily and prevent the Thai Population from free thinking and teach the population to be greedy and corrupt, while telling them they are the best race in the World. Think about it it is true?

[penzman]

Unless they plan to make major changes at ITV, it just can't get worse.

[marquess]

Probably an opportunity to hear a different point of view, and set some new standards for news reporting. Singapore has a good reputation when it come to doing foreign news reporting, lets hope that some of that comes down here! Rather than the usual staid nonsense that we seem to get. I can just imagine some people quaking in their boots, at the prospect of investigative journalism on their doorsteps!

[Jai Dee]

Don't forget the the origin of this news bulletin is ThaiDay, which is part of the Manager group, which is owned by Sondhi...

None of the usual Thai News Agencies that publish English language news bulletins via their Public Relations Departments published this story...

Not translated... or not reported?

[steveromagnino]

Singapore has one of the controlled medias within the region, so while generally their foreign reporting is decent, there is still significant censorship.

Given the direct relationship between the people who control the media in Singapore, the head of Temasak and the effective leader of the country, I do not see that we would be well off with them owning it.

However, the last few years with the people who run the country, business and therefore control the media by ad budgets has not been any better.

How will they find ownership without political connections? As a worker ant with one of THailand's business families, I can tell you a little secret, we all try to stack the govt with our own family members to ensure our interests are protected. There would be hardly any left without some business connection, and certainly few if any in the media sector who are partisan.

And anyway, the big ad budget firms can control content if they want to interfere like...ahem.... AIS has been doing for the last few years.... run favourable content or we pull our MASSIVE ad budget. And they aren't the only ones doing it, The Mall Group are another major player in this approach. The list goes on....

Same as Time Warner, Murdoch and others; it is getting increasingly difficult to get balanced news coverage around the world due to ownership.

Not sure what the answer is, limit on shareholding might help, but hard to say....

[britainmal]

Same as Time Warner, Murdoch and others; it is getting increasingly difficult to get balanced news coverage around the world due to ownership.

Not sure what the answer is, limit on shareholding might help, but hard to say....

If you want balanced news coverage watch Fox News. Actually, The main problem is that the Thai Media has a one-sided view on everything, unlike Western Media. Thai People also have this theory that Thais' must own everything, if not Thais' will be the working slaves' of foreigners'. This mentality will make Thailand a racist soceity just like Korea(for example.) They need to follow International rules and laws that Foreign ownership is not a bad thing is good for the country and everybody has the right to own a business in foreign country just like Thais' can do the samething. For example-Shin Corp. and Samaat Corp. being a mobile telphone provider in Cambodia-These companies are Thai comapanies and you don't see the Cambodians acting racist and against the idea. This is the main problem, so I hope all you Thais' reading this wake up and spread the reality to all the Thai people. This law that foreigners' can only own 49 percent of a business when the reality is that most of the captail invested is by foreigners, but the final decision power is in the hands of Thais'. Is this fair? We(foreigners) can start up a business, but we have no final say in how we run the business. This is a racist law just like the condo act , which does not follow International fair play laws. If we (foreigners) invest in a business any where in the world we should have a final say in everything or at least allow 50 percent ownership in the business.