On 9/18/2016 at 7:14 PM, hansnl said:

Yes, so am I.

You think they got their money back?

I expect so - and for that (and other reasons....) they have sensibly decided to keep very quiet!

Catch 22 - reporting the news is a business, not a charity. But people are not prepared to pay for their news if they feel they are not getting what they are paying for, and news organizations cannot afford to pay for extra staff in what is a very labor intensive field if they are not getting revenue. 

 

I pay subscriptions to certain news organizations when I feel they are worth it - in other words, when I'm getting what I pay for. Obviously, the reverse is true also. How about you guys? Are you paying, or still expecting ad revenue, which is very thinly spread these days, to offset your reading pleasures?

 

PS: An earlier poster said "it only takes one guy". Wrong. Besides having enormous overheads (for example, the wire services and syndications alone cost many millions of baht), newsrooms require a huge staff (even more when they involve a foreign language because of the extra layer of translators). I'm happy to explain the machinations if anyone wants.

2 hours ago, Dexlowe said:

Catch 22 - reporting the news is a business, not a charity. But people are not prepared to pay for their news if they feel they are not getting what they are paying for, and news organizations cannot afford to pay for extra staff in what is a very labor intensive field if they are not getting revenue. 

 

I pay subscriptions to certain news organizations when I feel they are worth it - in other words, when I'm getting what I pay for. Obviously, the reverse is true also. How about you guys? Are you paying, or still expecting ad revenue, which is very thinly spread these days, to offset your reading pleasures?

 

PS: An earlier poster said "it only takes one guy". Wrong. Besides having enormous overheads (for example, the wire services and syndications alone cost many millions of baht), newsrooms require a huge staff (even more when they involve a foreign language because of the extra layer of translators). I'm happy to explain the machinations if anyone wants.

I would certainly be happy to pay a small amount each month for PROPER, UNBIASED news.

 

The problems is that all media sources are biased - and so I can see no reason to pay biased sources when its fairly easy to surf the net and get most of the info.

 

Investigative journalists have pretty much died a death - possibly because newspaper readership has seriously declined (hence not enough money to pay investigative journalists) as most of it is biased rubbish!

 

Back on topic!  There's no excuse for the lack of follow-up on cases here.  It would cost pretty much bugger all, so I can only assume there are other reasons why they prefer not to report the end result - i.e. sentencing.

I thoroughly and empathetically follow the OP's line of thinking.

 

However, if you've lived here any length of time, you already know the end of the story when it comes to hi-so folks "interacting" with "justice."

In most cases the "end of the story" is too embarrassing, and all the public/media know it.  Save local and national face.  Sweep it under the rug.  On to the next breaking scandal--that's where the real headline-grabbers are, for the most of the populace.  

How can people call it "press' in Asia in beyond understanding. No respect for any of them.

On 18/09/2016 at 1:29 PM, neeray said:

I agree with the OP 100%. The concept of follow up has often occurred to me but he hit the keyboard and exposed the issue (I only thought about it). 

For me, it would not have to be a long explanatory follow up. A couple sentences would do. 

This could be ground-breaking for Thaivisa. One person at a desk should be able to handle it. 

I asked for followup years ago,obviosly fallen on deaf ears.