It's The Media's Job To Ask The Hard Questions: Thai Editorial

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

It's the media's job to ask the hard questions

The Nation

When confronted with ugly truths, more often than not the Thai authorities still try to deflect blame or conceal facts to avoid embarrassment

BANGKOK: -- Around July 2006 there was a story involving two pre-teen twin boys believed to have magical powers, who had helped "direct" Karen rebel soldiers in their fight against the Burmese army. When the game was finally up for the twins, local and foreign journalists, including the Burmese-language service of the BBC, flocked to Ratchaburi's Suang Pheung district to cover the "surrender" of the brothers, Johnny and Luther Htoo. It seemed that everybody and anybody was permitted to take part in a press conference that included the then prime minister, Chuan Leekpai, and the then Army chief, General Surayud Chulanont.

A BBC reporter working for the Burmese service was briefly detained by Thai police at the scene. When a police officer was asked by other journalists what was the charge against the Burmese reporter, the reply was simple: "He's Burmese."

When asked what being Burmese had to do with anything, the officer struggled for answer: "He will write bad stuff about Burma."

"But the Thai media, and the entire world for that matter, write negative things about Burma," retorted one Thai journalist.

The officer went back to his stock answer: "He's Burmese."

The low-key confrontation ended abruptly when the Thai reporter informed the officer that he would contact the BBC's office in Bangkok and perhaps they could clear up the matter with the police officer's superior in the capital.

Desperate for an exit, the officer looked at the reporters and said, "Well, since you all vouch for him, take him then."

Moments later, just as embarrassing, was the then Ratchaburi governor insisting that reporters not make any reference to Burma, for fear that it would offend the neighbouring country.

Most of the reporters present looked at him and went on with their questions about the conflict and insurgency in Burma, now known as Myanmar.

No questions about Myanmar at a press conference held to announce the surrender of two "rebel leaders" supposedly with magical powers? Reporters couldn't believe the audacity of the authorities in trying to prevent or dissuade them from asking the most obvious questions about the most obvious issue.

Today, Thailand has not progressed any further in terms of how government officials deal with the media, either local or foreign. Similar absurdity was witnessed this past Tuesday at a press conference during which a police spokesman, Piya Uthayo, tried hard to pacify the press after it was discovered that riot police had slapped and kicked photographers covering the Pitak Siam anti-government protest last Saturday.

Tosarit Wattanarat, a cameraman for T-News, lodged a complaint at the Nanlerng Police Station on Tuesday. He accused the police of assaulting him and destroying his camera.

ASTV Manager photographer Santi Tehpia and Thai PBS cameraman Pattanasak Woradet said they were beaten by officers who mistook them for Pitak Siam protesters. The reporters said they tried to show their press ID cards after being locked up in a truck, but police paid no attention. The two were released later, after fellow reporters looked for them and confirmed their identities.

Piya denied ever saying the cameramen were detained "because they were shooting a violent incident and in doing so violated people's rights". But media groups on Saturday claimed that Piya had indeed defended the arrests with such a statement.

Putting on a brave face, although not brave enough to justify the beating of the journalists, Piya tried hard to turn the tables. Essentially he called the detention of the journalists a "misunderstanding" and instructed them, in future, to make sure that they have their credentials handy. No apology or remorse whatsoever.

It's reasonable, although not justifiable, to assume that riot police on the scene may have got carried away with their work and let emotion get the better of them. But Piya and the police brass had plenty of time to sleep on the case - at least for two days - before they responded publicly. And when they did, they refused to give any credence to the suggestion that the ugly scenes may have had to do with a lack of discipline and training on the part of the riot police.

-- The Nation 2012-11- 30

[Moruya]

3 journalists, 3 disparate media outlets, same treatment.

Well done BiB

[cloudhopper]

"Today, Thailand has not progressed any further in terms of how government officials deal with the media,"

Nor has the Thai press progressed any further with any real investigative reporting, fact checking or following up on any of the endless ridiculous government media releases. It's up to you to stop being a fiddle for the government to diddle.

[arthurboy]

It's the media's job to ask the hard questions

You're dead right, Mr. Editor.

So, start asking them.

[bigbamboo]

It's the media's job to ask the hard questions

You're dead right, Mr. Editor.

So, start asking them.

Thailand needs a Jeremy Paxmanpingpongporn.

[Moruya]

Pornorama?

[Thai at Heart]

Pornorama?

They used to have a Thai version of Spitting Image about 5 years ago. The comic scripts weren't as funny as the actual political statements in the press.

[Zooheekock]

Coming from the Nation, it's a case of do as I say, not as I do.

[Thai at Heart]

Ask hard questions. They find it hard enough to tie Yingluck down in parliament when she is sitting still.

It is the complete and utter lack of follow up on the stories that is the problem. Make a headline, and then the story goes completely and utterly silent and is only restarted when a politician speaks about it. There is an obligation (if not some money in it) to chase these stories down and get more and more details, because at the moment, it is the politicians that can hide the truth because the media don't chase it. The politicians are setting the agenda.

Yesterday, i was scanning the internet version of the other paper. I think I found about 7 murder stories. It was a quite incredible number. Now I don't doubt that they have a relatively small amount of staff, but these political stories should be chased down to keep the politicians honest to a certain level.

[MaxLee]

It's the next generation journalist's job to defame Chalerm ...

[Moruya]

Ask hard questions. They find it hard enough to tie Yingluck down in parliament when she is sitting still.

It is the complete and utter lack of follow up on the stories that is the problem. Make a headline, and then the story goes completely and utterly silent and is only restarted when a politician speaks about it. There is an obligation (if not some money in it) to chase these stories down and get more and more details, because at the moment, it is the politicians that can hide the truth because the media don't chase it. The politicians are setting the agenda.

Yesterday, i was scanning the internet version of the other paper. I think I found about 7 murder stories. It was a quite incredible number. Now I don't doubt that they have a relatively small amount of staff, but these political stories should be chased down to keep the politicians honest to a certain level.

I have to agree with each of your 3 statements there.

and add that Murders do seem to be on the rise......

[virtualtraveller]

First question you can ask is, have you proof read your own stories properly. Chuan was not prime minister in 2006. I think the incident you are referring to was in 1996.

[Pimay1]

Speaking of hard questions and follow up, does anyone know the latest on the idiot office manager who slapped the lady around because she wouldn't sign a document that she thought was including corruption? It made a big splash for a couple of days and now has gone the way of Chalerm being drunk in Parliment.

[billd766]

Actually Chuan Leekpai was PM from 1992 to 1995 and then again from 1997 to 2001. Source Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia....i/Chuan_Leekpai

Johnny and Luther Htoo. The twins surrendered to Thai soldiers in January 2001 and requested sanctuary. By that time the number of their followers had dwindled to 20. They repudiated the stories about being invulnerable but insisted that God had helped them to survive over the years. They were reunited with their family. In July 2006, Johnny Htoo surrendered in Burma's military government with eight other members of God's Army in two groups.

Source Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia....and_Luther_Htoo

It only took me a couple of moments to find that out and it appears that whoever wrote the editorial didn't even do a search on Google and whoever was supposed to check it before publication was asleep or couldn't be bothered.

Very poor journalism.

Edited November 30, 2012 by billd766

[Skywalker69]

It's the next generation journalist's job to defame Chalerm ...

He will be dead by then.............hopefully.

[osiboy]

Ask hard questions. They find it hard enough to tie Yingluck down in parliament when she is sitting still.

It is the complete and utter lack of follow up on the stories that is the problem. Make a headline, and then the story goes completely and utterly silent and is only restarted when a politician speaks about it. There is an obligation (if not some money in it) to chase these stories down and get more and more details, because at the moment, it is the politicians that can hide the truth because the media don't chase it. The politicians are setting the agenda.

Yesterday, i was scanning the internet version of the other paper. I think I found about 7 murder stories. It was a quite incredible number. Now I don't doubt that they have a relatively small amount of staff, but these political stories should be chased down to keep the politicians honest to a certain level.

your right, they should be chased up , but with one mafia investigating the other mafia there would be alot of face lost and blood spilled , so it will never happen , thailand will never change , its gang warfare on a grand scale .......honour amoung thieves weeving ever more complex situations that wil never be dealt with becouse its rotten to the core and fear of finding the truth out wieghs the justice and fair society that the thai people deserve ," stand and deliver.....your money or your life "

[cup-O-coffee]

It's odd that these reporters say what the Thai authorities did to them, but we never see it on you-tube. With all the hidden gizmos and gadgets available to plant on one's own person, it seems rather strange that these reporters don't use their cameras as the decoy and get the Thai Authorities to take the bait, and then catch them doing what they say, but we never see.

Perhaps the Thai reporters are guilty of ruining their chances at being allowed near anything news worthy and instead behave like cowards in the hopes that we will believe them. Why? Because they are reporters? Because their Editor writes a poo-poo article about how the naughty Thai Authorities are picking on those po' little reporters who are just trying to do their job? Perhaps they forget that the world does not take a Thai's word at face value recently, and reporters emphatically are no exception. Why? Because they are Thai and they all come from the same mix; including those they accuse or make implications towards.

Until they put their jobs on the line and do what they are quite capable of doing, I will keep their words at a general level of Thai "white lies" and FACE-motivated utterances. I sense in this article that the editor is hanging his heart on his sleeve for a little sympathy for himself (herself?) and those misunderstood reporters at large.

I still don't see it... all these reporters standing around, and not one of them ever seems to get anything on film and put it on you-tube... not ever... at any time... during all these so-called physical attacks or camera snatches against reporters? C'mon fellas! Who's pulling whose leg?

Show me the money, and then I'll shed a tear. You make out like your job is so important and edifying to all of us ignorant readers, yet when it comes time to step up and walk the talk, you back down and play by some kind of invisible rules that avoid any threat to your abilities to report. What are you afraid of, really? I think the answer lies within, and not with some Thai Authority.

If what you say is true, then you should not be ashamed of going to all extents to show it. If it means seeking asylum, then you should not be afraid of the truth, because it is still the truth. If you cannot handle reporting the truth, and instead make up your own rules on how much truth is allowable, then I think it is time you stand down and stop with the pathetic attempts at sympathy-vote-getting.

Most of what you tell us we already know or sense, and your half truths only bungle up our own efforts to get there.

[simple1]

Ask a hard question and the media outlet/journalist will be threatened with a libel/defamation law suite as recently happened in the verbal clash between the TV Channel 7 reporter and Chalerm. That was in the public domain, so what happens behind the scene? There is limited democracy in action/freedom of speech in Thailand as government agencies & business manipulate the law to suppress news they view as an embarrassment or undermines creditability.

Edited November 30, 2012 by simple1

[Thai at Heart]

Ask hard questions. They find it hard enough to tie Yingluck down in parliament when she is sitting still.

It is the complete and utter lack of follow up on the stories that is the problem. Make a headline, and then the story goes completely and utterly silent and is only restarted when a politician speaks about it. There is an obligation (if not some money in it) to chase these stories down and get more and more details, because at the moment, it is the politicians that can hide the truth because the media don't chase it. The politicians are setting the agenda.

Yesterday, i was scanning the internet version of the other paper. I think I found about 7 murder stories. It was a quite incredible number. Now I don't doubt that they have a relatively small amount of staff, but these political stories should be chased down to keep the politicians honest to a certain level.

your right, they should be chased up , but with one mafia investigating the other mafia there would be alot of face lost and blood spilled , so it will never happen , thailand will never change , its gang warfare on a grand scale .......honour amoung thieves weeving ever more complex situations that wil never be dealt with becouse its rotten to the core and fear of finding the truth out wieghs the justice and fair society that the thai people deserve ," stand and deliver.....your money or your life "

Well, the media as a rule is largely immune from physical violence, however, they do tend to get walloped with defamation cases. That's why they really need to do the full investigation and get all the evidence in hand before they spill half the story. This is why I am actually pi***d off with Abhisit, because he had a chance to change so many things but he really did miss a chance.

The defamation law, the lese majeste law, start a legal review to change the legal system. He really was just a puppet for those who put him there.

To make an omelette you have to break some eggs.

[jbrain]

It's the media's job to ask the hard questions

You're dead right, Mr. Editor.

So, start asking them.

With the accentuation on DEAD, I assume. Edited November 30, 2012 by jbrain

[DocN]

So funny, that this piece comes up, after two journalists were "attacked" (who knows?!) by the police over the PS- rally!

Where are the questions over certain peoples sons and shooting practice? Where are questions about certain Ferrari- drivers? Where are the follow ups and hard questions on security issues in nightclubs?

It is all good for 1 headline and then it is GONE!

[khunken]

It's odd that these reporters say what the Thai authorities did to them, but we never see it on you-tube. With all the hidden gizmos and gadgets available to plant on one's own person, it seems rather strange that these reporters don't use their cameras as the decoy and get the Thai Authorities to take the bait, and then catch them doing what they say, but we never see.

Perhaps the Thai reporters are guilty of ruining their chances at being allowed near anything news worthy and instead behave like cowards in the hopes that we will believe them. Why? Because they are reporters? Because their Editor writes a poo-poo article about how the naughty Thai Authorities are picking on those po' little reporters who are just trying to do their job? Perhaps they forget that the world does not take a Thai's word at face value recently, and reporters emphatically are no exception. Why? Because they are Thai and they all come from the same mix; including those they accuse or make implications towards.

Until they put their jobs on the line and do what they are quite capable of doing, I will keep their words at a general level of Thai "white lies" and FACE-motivated utterances. I sense in this article that the editor is hanging his heart on his sleeve for a little sympathy for himself (herself?) and those misunderstood reporters at large.

I still don't see it... all these reporters standing around, and not one of them ever seems to get anything on film and put it on you-tube... not ever... at any time... during all these so-called physical attacks or camera snatches against reporters? C'mon fellas! Who's pulling whose leg?

Show me the money, and then I'll shed a tear. You make out like your job is so important and edifying to all of us ignorant readers, yet when it comes time to step up and walk the talk, you back down and play by some kind of invisible rules that avoid any threat to your abilities to report. What are you afraid of, really? I think the answer lies within, and not with some Thai Authority.

If what you say is true, then you should not be ashamed of going to all extents to show it. If it means seeking asylum, then you should not be afraid of the truth, because it is still the truth. If you cannot handle reporting the truth, and instead make up your own rules on how much truth is allowable, then I think it is time you stand down and stop with the pathetic attempts at sympathy-vote-getting.

Most of what you tell us we already know or sense, and your half truths only bungle up our own efforts to get there.

A few points about your diatribe. The reporters' cameras were smashed by the police. The police partially admitted they were wrong when accused by the TJA. Finally, I'd believe a journalist before the BIB any day.

[richard10365]

I think freedom of the press is over rated and the press should be controlled. The press is owned by the rich with their own agenda which they use their reporters to push that agenda. They cleverly construct their stories in a way that twists facts to support that agenda. CNN, FOX, and a host of others are all guilty of it. I believe in a certain amount of freedom of the press to report the news but I'm totally against the press deciding what is and is not public opinion.

[hellodolly]

So funny, that this piece comes up, after two journalists were "attacked" (who knows?!) by the police over the PS- rally!

Where are the questions over certain peoples sons and shooting practice? Where are questions about certain Ferrari- drivers? Where are the follow ups and hard questions on security issues in nightclubs?

It is all good for 1 headline and then it is GONE!

Welcome to journalism values the world over. Today's headlines tomorrows inside page paragraph and then nothing.

[hellodolly]

I think freedom of the press is over rated and the press should be controlled. The press is owned by the rich with their own agenda which they use their reporters to push that agenda. They cleverly construct their stories in a way that twists facts to support that agenda. CNN, FOX, and a host of others are all guilty of it. I believe in a certain amount of freedom of the press to report the news but I'm totally against the press deciding what is and is not public opinion.

It most certainly is over rated. England is now studding different formats to regulate it. The one article I looked at said the4y were looking at a method used in Denmark where the press themselves have a hand in making decisions on articles that were deemed wrong. Apparently they are trying to use journalist's with moral values.

[Thai at Heart]

I think freedom of the press is over rated and the press should be controlled. The press is owned by the rich with their own agenda which they use their reporters to push that agenda. They cleverly construct their stories in a way that twists facts to support that agenda. CNN, FOX, and a host of others are all guilty of it. I believe in a certain amount of freedom of the press to report the news but I'm totally against the press deciding what is and is not public opinion.

Just yesterday a prime minister of a genuine democracy was faced with a report recommending controlling the press.

He abruptly said, that ANYTHING curbs the free press in his country has to be considered very carefully.

After 75 years of so called democracy in Thailand they still can't grasp that the freedom of the press is a vital component to democracy, and here you are saying tar it should be controlled MORE?

The defamation laws here impinge on disclosing so much vital public information that it is largely impossible to uncover governmental corruption.

Even if a reporter has paper proof, he will still get sued. But this is an important juncture in Thai politics and i hope the journalists steel themselves and be brave for the next 2 or 3 years

Or else we will be living in a very different Thailand in 5 to 10 years time.

This is their professional obligation to the country, no less than a doctor to his patient.

[fasteddie]

It's odd that these reporters say what the Thai authorities did to them, but we never see it on you-tube. With all the hidden gizmos and gadgets available to plant on one's own person, it seems rather strange that these reporters don't use their cameras as the decoy and get the Thai Authorities to take the bait, and then catch them doing what they say, but we never see.

Perhaps the Thai reporters are guilty of ruining their chances at being allowed near anything news worthy and instead behave like cowards in the hopes that we will believe them. Why? Because they are reporters? Because their Editor writes a poo-poo article about how the naughty Thai Authorities are picking on those po' little reporters who are just trying to do their job? Perhaps they forget that the world does not take a Thai's word at face value recently, and reporters emphatically are no exception. Why? Because they are Thai and they all come from the same mix; including those they accuse or make implications towards.

Until they put their jobs on the line and do what they are quite capable of doing, I will keep their words at a general level of Thai "white lies" and FACE-motivated utterances. I sense in this article that the editor is hanging his heart on his sleeve for a little sympathy for himself (herself?) and those misunderstood reporters at large.

I still don't see it... all these reporters standing around, and not one of them ever seems to get anything on film and put it on you-tube... not ever... at any time... during all these so-called physical attacks or camera snatches against reporters? C'mon fellas! Who's pulling whose leg?

Show me the money, and then I'll shed a tear. You make out like your job is so important and edifying to all of us ignorant readers, yet when it comes time to step up and walk the talk, you back down and play by some kind of invisible rules that avoid any threat to your abilities to report. What are you afraid of, really? I think the answer lies within, and not with some Thai Authority.

If what you say is true, then you should not be ashamed of going to all extents to show it. If it means seeking asylum, then you should not be afraid of the truth, because it is still the truth. If you cannot handle reporting the truth, and instead make up your own rules on how much truth is allowable, then I think it is time you stand down and stop with the pathetic attempts at sympathy-vote-getting.

Most of what you tell us we already know or sense, and your half truths only bungle up our own efforts to get there.

Did you miss the part about their cameras being smashed by the fuzz?

[Baloo22]

Anyone expecting the type of investigative journalism that is routine in the western world is going to have to wait a while. Among other things, the defamation laws are both civil and criminal. Those laws are used as a club to discourage and smother any such investigative reporting. The real purpose the defamation laws are to protect the big people, the "high-class", from reporting that may impact them or their activities.

A journalist by the name Erika Fry learned that lesson when, working for a major newspaper here, she did a news story on a Thai official that had been accused of plagiarizing his doctoral dissertation. Take a read of "Escape From Thailand" and "Escape from Thailand: Epilogue" from the Columbia Journalism Review. What happened to Erika Fry is the result of her investigative reporting on someone not really that high up in the "pu yai" status.

When a journalist does some damage to or angers one of the real biggies, they have a good chance of ending up like Wisut "Ae" Tangwittayaporn from Phuket. "Newspaper reporter shot, killed in Thailand"

[Fozfromoz]

Anyone expecting the type of investigative journalism that is routine in the western world is going to have to wait a while. Among other things, the defamation laws are both civil and criminal. Those laws are used as a club to discourage and smother any such investigative reporting. The real purpose the defamation laws are to protect the big people, the "high-class", from reporting that may impact them or their activities.

A journalist by the name Erika Fry learned that lesson when, working for a major newspaper here, she did a news story on a Thai official that had been accused of plagiarizing his doctoral dissertation. Take a read of "Escape From Thailand" and "Escape from Thailand: Epilogue" from the Columbia Journalism Review. What happened to Erika Fry is the result of her investigative reporting on someone not really that high up in the "pu yai" status.

When a journalist does some damage to or angers one of the real biggies, they have a good chance of ending up like Wisut "Ae" Tangwittayaporn from Phuket. "Newspaper reporter shot, killed in Thailand"

The Escape from Thailand is an interesting read, and quite alarming. Its probably never going to happen, but they need to get rid of this stupid face culture, plugged to the defamation. No one likes to put up their hand and admit error, or cheating, but most can do so if backed into that corner. Here they are happy to see people destroyed so that they can have their face. Instead of addressing the problems, they attack the people that raise them.

Of course i am not stating anything that we all dont know.

[cup-O-coffee]

A few points about your diatribe. The reporters' cameras were smashed by the police. The police partially admitted they were wrong when accused by the TJA. Finally, I'd believe a journalist before the BIB any day.

You did not make any points about my post because you did not call out any points from my post. You only made three points apart from my post. So, is there a point to this?

But I digress. I will respond to your post:

One:

The items smashed should not have been the only items that these brilliant and educated reporters had in their arsenal. Otherwise, they are stupid idiots to walk into a fight with only one weapon and no concealed backup. Reporters are soldiers and they fight a war for truth. These idiots are green, wet behind the ears, FNG's.

Two:

What in Hell is partially admitting? And when has that ever had anything to do with anything when dealing with Thais? We all know that even an oath of office is left at the podium when the newly sworn in Thai departs. Words. Merely words.

Three:

Well, I choose not to believe any of them because they both have no proof beyond any reasonable doubt. Smashing a camera could be for many reasons, and I do not dismiss the fact the reporters can be rude <deleted> as well, and make one soldier feel like an idiot; simply because the reporters courage swells with numbers.

Did you miss the part about their cameras being smashed by the fuzz?

No. I did not. I suggested, or rather implied, that the reporters should not limit their arsenal of recording equipment to only large, cumbersome cameras.

When entering a zone where the action is, and that the reporter more than likely knows what is coming,why is it so difficult for a reporter to continually go back into action with the same methods and same equipment, when they know there is a chance that they will encounter this sort of behavior?

And yet they do this time and time again, without any forethought of alternative measures to document or record in the event their first choice of equioment is confiscated, destroyed, or rendered inoperative.

So, to untangle your perception, I am suggesting that the reporters plant micro cameras on their person in the form of pen cameras, button cameras, hat cameras, etc.

We see it all the time on television when reporters go into brothels and other places where corruption of ponzy scams are revealed in documentaries.

The sense of urgency painted into the editorial does not mesh when one considers the lack of genuine desire to get to the truth no matter what. Why do these reporters fail in this? I have my opinions, and I am sure you have yours.