Why journalists shouldn't double as activists

[phycokiller]

this guy has a long way to go before he practices what he preaches, I prefer to regard all journalism as one persons perspective, what else can it be? there is no higher authority that can say what the truth is for you, you have to find it yourself

[connda]

There's a difference? Really? Da*m

[bamnutsak]

Sorry, but anyone who writes anything factual which is judged to be "bad" about the Junta is an "activist".

"Activists" bad.

[EnglishJohn]

"Thai politics hovers among several layers of truth"

Obviously written by a journalist defending his industry. Thai politics is several layers of lies. The truth is lost the moment after it happened. I have never known a country where lies are so freely and readily spoken with no apparent conscience or concern for ethics.

I wonder if Jonathan Head has read this article. His 'lies by omission' in his BBC reports during the last protests were disgraceful. Reports like "Anti-government protests turned violent and 10 people were killed" does not accurately describe 10 peaceful protesters being murdered by government-backed terrorists with M79 grenade launchers.

[jayboy]

"Why journalists shouldn't double as activists"

"Why military shouldn't double as politicians"

The worst leaders are Generals especially Retired ones .

Eisenhower in the USA was a retired general and he didn't do too badly.

I'm trying to think of other similarities between Ike and Prayuth, both as you say retired generals who became political leaders of their nation.

Let's start with Ike

1.Incorruptible - no questions arose of how his relatively moderate wealth arose.

2.A fighting general who was a successful commander in the field against one of the most formidable armies in the history of conflict.

3.A loyal supporter of the Constitution and the vision of the Founding Fathers, and the idea of the common man.

4.Unquestionable legitimacy having been elected President by the American people in a fair democratic election.

5.Will live in history as a great man who understand he was the servant not the master of his people.

On second thoughts I don't think I'll bother with Prayuth. The point has been made.

[losgrad]

A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson regarding newspapers and government:

-------------------------

Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

Thomas Jefferson

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.

Thomas Jefferson

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.

Thomas Jefferson

[Loeilad]

A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson regarding newspapers and government:

-------------------------

Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

Thomas Jefferson

The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.

Thomas Jefferson

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government.

Thomas Jefferson

“If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed.” - Mark Twain

[smutcakes]

I note the Nation did not name their own political activist who was vocallly against Pravit, and there are also pictures of him blowing a whistle and kissing Suthep on stage... I presume that type of activism is encouraged.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

This editorial stinks of an effort - and a lame one at that - to try to justify their actions over Pravit. The editor and his staff need to put up a more convincing argument. Every journalist is an activist in one form or another. It goes with the territory and is what, in some measure, the public wants from them. The Nation is just trying to deny reality.

That's my working assumption as well, regarding the intention of this editorial.

Seems to be a back-handed attempt by the newspaper to publicly justify its dismissal of the reporter who recently was detained/incarcerated by the government -- without ever even mentioning his name or case in the editorial itself.

What makes this situation a bit reprehensible is this "journalist" guy had worked for The Nation for a long time, and his views and perspective were pretty well known from his writings. And, AFAIK, before the government intervened lately, the newspaper hadn't done anything to warn him or restrict him in that regard. So just who's responsible for how things turned out?

The other thing to mention is, Thai journalists have a bit of a different style from those typically found in the west. It's not uncommon here for the "senior" "reporters" here to act and write more like opinion columnists... as opposed to the junior reporters who pretty much just parrot out whatever statements the various officials provide, without much context or explanation -- which is more than evident from The Nation's daily reporting.

So what I'm trying to say here is, the way this guy was writing was not all that different from the way a lot of "senior" Thai reporters operate, regardless of what political side or alliance they're favorable to. Same with the newspapers at large, rather than being neutral or objective, historically, there have always been some well-known by everyone to be in favor of this or that political faction at the time.

Neutrality, objectivity and fair-minded reporting aren't exactly the hallmarks of the journalism "profession" here.

[idannyb]

Everyone, and perhaps especially journalists, has their biases. The challenge is reining in biased ‘reporting’ and preserving a sense of balance. A delicate trick very few have mastered. I think the late Tim Russert (Meet the Press) was very good at playing Devil’s advocate, and no matter the interviewee or subject matter, you had a hard time gauging his politics or bias. Wish there were more journalists of Russert’s ilk. We are all better served when those in power are called to account.

The Nation editorial goes on to suggest that bias has no place in journalism unless such reports are posted in some clearly segmented opinion-editorial (“commentary”) section. One problem with this noble ideal, however, is the current deep chilling of the Fourth Estate in Thailand. The Nation piece states that commentary posts “can serve as a balance weight to the power of government when it becomes arbitrary or unjust.” < Let’s hope the Nation does not truncate this important journalistic responsibility.

[This Thing of Darkness]

Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth , if the Government or powers that be try yo spin the truth then the Journalists are accused of being activists or agitators

[Loeilad]

Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth , if the Government or powers that be try yo spin the truth then the Journalists are accused of being activists or agitators

"Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth" - how you can come this far on the thread and still believe this to be the case, is beyond me.

[This Thing of Darkness]

Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth , if the Government or powers that be try yo spin the truth then the Journalists are accused of being activists or agitators

"Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth" - how you can come this far on the thread and still believe this to be the case, is beyond me.

I don t believe reading other peoples rants and bias can can change something that should be a fact, journalism should be an unbiased truth

“The purpose of journalism,” write Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in The Elements of Journalism, “is not defined by technology, nor by journalists or the techniques they employ.” Rather, “the principles and purpose of journalism are defined by something more basic: the function news plays in the lives of people.”

News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.

The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments.

[Loeilad]

Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth , if the Government or powers that be try yo spin the truth then the Journalists are accused of being activists or agitators

"Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth" - how you can come this far on the thread and still believe this to be the case, is beyond me.

I don t believe reading other peoples rants and bias can can change something that should be a fact, journalism should be an unbiased truth

“The purpose of journalism,” write Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in The Elements of Journalism, “is not defined by technology, nor by journalists or the techniques they employ.” Rather, “the principles and purpose of journalism are defined by something more basic: the function news plays in the lives of people.”

News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.

The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments.

Ah...i see the problem - you can't understand or interpret what others have written.......

[This Thing of Darkness]

Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth , if the Government or powers that be try yo spin the truth then the Journalists are accused of being activists or agitators

"Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth" - how you can come this far on the thread and still believe this to be the case, is beyond me.

I don t believe reading other peoples rants and bias can can change something that should be a fact, journalism should be an unbiased truth

“The purpose of journalism,” write Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in The Elements of Journalism, “is not defined by technology, nor by journalists or the techniques they employ.” Rather, “the principles and purpose of journalism are defined by something more basic: the function news plays in the lives of people.”

News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.

The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments.

Ah...i see the problem - you can't understand or interpret what others have written.......

Not when its BS no ,but it looks like you thrive on it and take it as Gospel

[Loeilad]

"Jounalism is about reporting an unbiased Truth" - how you can come this far on the thread and still believe this to be the case, is beyond me.

I don t believe reading other peoples rants and bias can can change something that should be a fact, journalism should be an unbiased truth

“The purpose of journalism,” write Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in The Elements of Journalism, “is not defined by technology, nor by journalists or the techniques they employ.” Rather, “the principles and purpose of journalism are defined by something more basic: the function news plays in the lives of people.”

News is that part of communication that keeps us informed of the changing events, issues, and characters in the world outside. Though it may be interesting or even entertaining, the foremost value of news is as a utility to empower the informed.

The purpose of journalism is thus to provide citizens with the information they need to make the best possible decisions about their lives, their communities, their societies, and their governments.

Ah...i see the problem - you can't understand or interpret what others have written.......

Not when its BS no ,but it looks like you thrive on it and take it as Gospel

I bet you can't articulate that into a coherent argument either.

[Thai at Heart]

When journalism enters politics it is virtually all opinion because it is interpreting the meaning of statements and polices proposed by politicians.

Politicians are supposed to be essentially truthful but part of a free society is for journalists to interpret and analyse policies and statements and hold politicians to account. This is where a free and varied 4th estate is absolutely necessary along with politicians that go beyond personality and instead reflect on policy.

Unfortunately, thailand journalists see themselves as part of the mechanism for influencing the people much more than they should and they ally themselves on way or another on the basis of criticising personalities and not policies, acts or deeds. They hold almost no one to account and parrot expedient statements to help politicians save face.

How did thaksin, Suthep and Sondhi bring the country to its knees? Because no one in the journalistic part of Thailand had the balls to show their crimes, conflict of interest and lies for what they were. It's one thing to be pro or anti red or yellow shirt, it's another to ignore the crimes of your own side and only hilight those of the other.

Journalists can take sides all they like, but when they Park their morals in the gutter they become part of the problem not the solution.