Freedom of expression in Thailand is now dead

Kavi Chongkittavorn, The Nation/Asia News Network, Bangkok

Freedom of expression in Thailand has come to an end. The incident that occurred last week at Narathiwat's Tak Bai police station was just the latest case of what has turned out to be more than just a knee-jerk reaction. It was a symptom of a society seeking to control freedom of expression and dissemination of information.

A group of print and broadcast journalists was lured to the headquarters for "a press conference", only to find themselves pressured for four hours into giving information to officers from the Crime Suppression Division about the Oct. 25 incident, which left 85 Muslim protesters dead. Police also demanded they surrender video footage of the carnage.

One of the main purposes was to identify the Nation photographer who snapped a photo of a soldier firing into the protesters instead of up into the air as repeatedly stated by the government. The encounter left an extremely bad impression on both sides. Police felt that it was the duty of the Thai media to help the officials, especially those working in the three southernmost provinces, while the media were caught in a dilemma: even though they thought the police request was inappropriate and unprofessional, they could not refuse.

Cheating the media has become the norm for the Thai authorities, especially during crises or whenever they find themselves dealing with sensitive issues. During the hostage- taking crisis at Ratchaburi Hospital in January 2000, dozens of journalists were fooled by the military information team into being confined to an assigned room, their movements limited during the military operation that ended with the killing of all of the hostage-takers.

Obviously, the objective was to restrict media access to the scene and lessen the ability to make a visual record that could be used by civic organizations to counter claims by the authorities in the future. The Prachathai. com set up by Senator John Ungphakorn managed to publish eye-witness reports and photographs on their website which challenged the official versions of Tak Bai.

As in previous blood-lettings involving state-sanctioned violence in the past three decades, the Thai media's news coverage and photographic display were later used as evidence.

In the past four years, there have been deliberate attempts not only to muzzle the media, a well-known fact now, but also to create an aura of fear among all strata of Thai bureaucrats. Officials no longer tell the truth to their colleagues, or even to their superiors. Elements of mistrust have been instilled. It should surprise no one that Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has surrounded himself with teams of intelligence officials who report to him directly on command.

The discrepancy between government explanations and eyewitness accounts of the Oct. 25 massacre is huge. As part of the crisis- management strategy, the government has tried to brand the medias reporting as unpatriotic. Thaksin has taken Thailands two English-language newspapers, The Nation and the Bangkok Post, to task, blaming them for portraying the country in a bad light.

Because of the deaths of Thai Muslims, authorities have criticized the media for focusing on their plight without sufficient coverage of the suffering that Thai Buddhist communities affected by the incidents have to endure.

A distinction must be made here between a news event itself and the news coverage thereafter. Inevitably, news headlines zero in on the carnage. Subsequent reports then need to be balanced and comprehensive in nature.

It is interesting to note that most of the Thai media, by and large, have chosen to stick to the official version of events without using their journalistic skills. Radio and television, which are under state control, have supported the official view that those who died were youngsters who were high on speed and died of suffocation.

As the independent investigation of the carnage continues, additional information has been disseminated in a more systematic way. The key message has perhaps been that more mistakes were made than the government cared to admit earlier. Thus some of them, we were told two weeks later, were drowned in a nearby river before they were stacked up in the military pickup trucks.

Well, let the truth be told. The biggest problem is that the governments statements contain no credibility whatsoever. The lack of transparency and accountability was very apparent in the ever-changing official explanations. When the top leader is caught flip-flopping his own words and labels, how can the public believe comments made by his subordinates and junior officials?

But the phenomenon described above does not apply to Thaksins Saturday radio chit-chat program, which has become an effective means of self-propaganda and self-aggrandizement. No one has ever questioned the assertions he has made every week for the past three and half years.

Thailand is on the way to becoming a highly manipulated society as far as information is concerned. The media will continue to be targets for cooptation and news spins. The next time something like the Oct. 25 massacre occurs, the blame will be squarely placed on the media for telling like it is.

So from the government's point of view, merely limiting freedom of expression and access to information is insufficient. Extra counter-measures must be devised to ensure the state reigns supreme and righteous as a source of information.

In short, the Saturday program is being perceived as a prototype for channels of news dissemination.