The mainstream Thai mass media faces a complex set of challenges ranging from legal barriers and political bias to other internal problems that prevent it from protecting the public interest and advancing freedom and democracy, Thailand's first Asian Media Barometer report has found.
The report, presented on Friday by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, highlighted several challenges including the Internal Security Act, the lese majeste law and the Computer Crime Act, all of which lead to self-censorship. Other constraints include the undue influence of advertisers, the Army and media owners.
"Thai citizens and journalists still assert their right to freedom of expression - but with a certain and palpable degree of fear," the report concluded.
Ten media professionals and experts, including this reporter, were invited in December to meet and discuss the Thai media in order to produce the first Asian Media Barometer (ANMB) report for Thailand.
The report said both citizens and journalists think twice about criticising powerful institutions such as the judiciary and the monarchy due to treason and lese majeste laws.
"This submission to the powers that be includes citizens being afraid of powerful media institutions or local mafia, and in the Deep South, of insurgents and the Army," it said. "It includes media professionals being afraid of media owners. And it includes a witch hunt in the new social media networks, where people expressing their opinions are harassed by the state or those from the opposite political camp."
Former senator Jon Ungpakorn, one of the contributors, said on Friday that the mainstream media, especially the print media, "heavily censored itself" from saying anything critical of the monarchy. Jon criticised the lack of local reporting about the Computer Crimes Act case against Jiranuch Premchaiporn, the editor of the Prachatai website, while Western papers such as The New York Times and the Guardian paid attention.
Jiranuch was charged for being too slow to delete comments made on the Prachatai web-board by 10 anonymous posters allegedly defaming the monarchy. Experts see the case as having deep repercussions for online freedom of expression. "Why don't they report? They're so docile!" said Jon.
Prasong Lertratanawisute, head of the Thai Journalists Association, speaking in a personal capacity, said Thai media had been taught not to report anything critical of the monarchy. He said it was Thai editors and not editors of The New York Times who risked being placed behind bars for lese majeste. "I'm not saying I agree or disagree with it. But in order to avoid the problem I'd rather not touch it," he said, adding that those advocating critical discussion about the monarchy "shouldn't express their heroism".
The report also concluded that few civil society organisations exist to advocate freedom of expression, with some groups finding it acceptable if media from the opposite political camp are suppressed. It also touched upon the widespread problem of gender stereotypes, bias and patriarchy.
"Media organisations have no policy to promote gender sensitivity or equal employment opportunities. There is also little effort to give equal and fair representation to ethnic minorities or people with disabilities."
The process of self-regulation was lacking or ineffective. "Media owners interfere both discreetly and openly when the gathering of news or political commentary results in exposing business affiliates or may threaten the generation of advertising revenue from the state or private companies."
