THE LONG RAINY SEASON
(published in 2001 in the Journal of the Faculty of Communication Arts, Chulalongkorn University)
MEDIA REFORM FROM BLACK
MAY TO RED OCTOBER
In Thailand the rainy
season is a traditional time for reflection and contemplation as the monsoon
rains lash the landscape, flood the fields and force activity indoors. This is the time of the year when
young men shave their heads and don the saffron robes of the monkhood for the
duration of the rains, also known as Buddhist Lent.
†
This past season of
turbulent weather and forced quietude was a busy one for defenders of free
speech and democracy as legislative bills, designed to make the media more free
in the future are bringing up bad memories of the past.
†
Thailand’s 1997
constitution, an ambitious legal document that says “never again” to the kind
of military privilege and over-centralization of power that has caused so much
heartache and exploitation in the past, is finally being implemented.
†
It’s about time. Thai
democracy burst onto the scene with the overthrow of absolute monarchy in
1932. Since then it has been a
story of two steps forward, one step back, with progress marred by frequent
coups d'etat, corrupt misuse of national
resources and authoritarian rule.
†
On the long and winding
road of Thailand’s trysts with democracy, defenders of free speech have been
forced to beat strategic retreats, but they have never gone away and when
suppressed harshly enough have burst back onto the scene with great resilience
and surprisingly little rancor.
†
The Thai Army has uniquely
reaped great profit and influence in its role as gatekeeper of the airwaves for
half a century. The Navy and Air Force have never been permitted to own TV
stations which has helped perpetuate their subordination to the Army. Cold War
emphasis on “nation-building” counter-insurgency was soon eclipsed by plain
greed as TV and radio concessions became crazy cash cows of advertising
revenue.
†
The Public Relations
department, the voice of whoever happens to be in power, is a key instrument in
controlling the airwaves. Its
power is underlined by the fact that the department has long been at the top of
the list of government facilities to be taken over during a coup attempt.
During Black May, the Public Relations Department on Rachdomnern Boulevard was
burned down by unknown arsonists. It has since relocated to a more secure
campus setting in a district surrounded by army bases.
†
Thai civil society took a
bold step away from the vicious coups of the past with the broadly liberal 1997
constitution that maps out the promise of increased democratization and
decentralization of power.
†
Just how to interpret the
fine print of 1997 constitution has been the source of endless argument, with
the Broadcast Bill alone getting newspaper attention nearly every day of humid
June, July and August. The tentative deadline for finishing all the paperwork,
comes on a sensitive day in a sensitive month; the sixth of October.
†
THE STRUGGLES OF OCTOBER
AND MAY
†
The tail end of the rainy
season this year, which ends on the night of the full moon in mid-October, will
see two monuments unveiled to victims of the “October struggle.” The harsh
crackdown on the student demonstrations of
October 14, 1973 led to
the toppling of a military dictatorship, but the
political experiment in democracy and free speech came to an abrupt end on
October 6, 1976 when a different faction of the military installed itself as
the new government.
This led to a dark
political period in which many students and intellectuals were jailed, others,
in despair of Thailand ever being democratic again, escaped to the jungle to
join the clandestine Communist Party of Thailand.
†
The story of how Thai
society almost self-destructed in the turbulent 1970’s is quasi-taboo but not
forgotten. The spirit of the fallen has been kept alive by an oral tradition of
poetry and song known as “art for life, songs for life.”
†
That’s why the setback of
May 1992, a brutal round of government-commanded bloodletting on the same
haunted streets where students had been felled in the “Red” Octobers of the
past, came as such a shock to the system.
†
"The first rain of
the rainy season," says poet Chiranan Pitpreecha in reference to the
events of May 1992, "was blood red."
†
It was not until this year
etching the memory of massacre victims could be etched in stone, so volatile
the topic for society at large. Tensions still linger. This past May, a
coalition of citizens seeking to shed light on the events of Black May
petitioned under Thailand’s freedom of information law to review government
documents the crackdown. What they got in response was a military report that
was presented with 60% of the text blacked out to protect "national
security."
†
Although more information
was released in a subsequent version, (“whiteout” was used instead of black ink
to allay fears of a cover-up}, the national mood was not one favorable to
reflection of past crimes. In July
Samak Sundarevej, an outspoken supporter of the military in all three
crackdowns, was elected mayor of Bangkok.
A few weeks later, Black May military strongman Suchinda Kraprayoon told a group of
birthday well-wishers that he’d carry out the crackdown again if he faced the
same choice again.
†
NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME
†
The wording of the Black
May-inspired broadcast bill has prompted a high-octane debate, as the new law
will determine who has access to the nation’s airwaves and under what
conditions.
†
The May 2000 draft of the
broadcast bill, penned by the governmental Council of State, an appointed
council that is fixed part of Thailand's executive branch codified as
inappropriate for broadcast anything that:
†
1) offends the heads of
state of foreign countries.
2) causes divisiveness
among the Thai people, insult
any ethnic group or be
detrimental to peace and order
or public morals.
3) jeopardizes foreign
relations.
4) is disrespectful of any
religion or desecrates
revered places.
5) flouts good traditions
and culture.
6) is sexually
provocative.
†
"I took a look at the
second draft of the controversial National Broadcasting Bill," wrote
Nation group editor in chief Suthichai Yoon," and I froze. Some of the
clauses, which are supposed to have been an improvement on the first version,
remind me of the bad old days of press censorship all over again."
†
The draft was sent back for
a re-write and fiddled with endlessly in tempo with the falling down rain. In September, as the final
touches were put on the bill for parliamentary approval, many of the above
taboos remained in place, although the clauses concerning foreign heads of state
and foreign relations were softened.
†
Thai journalists and media
specialists, long accustomed to treating the monarchy with great reverence,
don’t oppose the idea of voluntary guidelines per se, but see dangers in
putting such unwritten rules into writing, which opens a Pandora’s box of
issues concerning appropriate adjudication, enforcement and punishment.
†
†
CITIZEN THAKSIN TRIES TO
BUY INDEPENDENT TV
†
The failure of Thai
government-controlled TV stations to report fairly on the street demonstrations
of Black May eventually led to the creation of non-governmental broadcaster known as
Independent TV, or iTV in 1997. But only three years later the only independent
station is bleeding money and fighting for its life.
†
In to the rescue comes Shin
Corporation, a wealthy telecommunications, satellite and media conglomerate
whose founder, Thaksin Shinawatra, has left the business world to form the
Thairakthai political party. Critics cried foul, saying Shin Corporation’s
proposed 39% to 70% purchase of iTV would threaten the station's
hard-fought-for neutrality, and the takeover has been delayed.
†
The torrent of disapproval
that hit Thaksin Shinawatra, who has Citizen Kane-style giant posters of
himself all over the metropolis, is rooted in bad memories of the past when
centralization of political power and control of the media meant one thing:
dictatorship. The tycoon’s
Thairakthai political party is one of the strongest forces in Thai politics
today as it represents the new money of the booming telecommunications sector
and the persuasive power of western style political conventions, fund-raising
and campaigning.
†
"It's as if CNN were
purchased by someone who owned the leading telecommunications and satellite
companies and was running for president," explains Dean Joompol Rodcumdee,
Dean of the Faculty of Communication Arts at Chulalongkorn University.
†
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE
BOTTOM LINE
†
The latest legislation to
come from the Council of State suggests a 15% limit, but limiting investment
creates a different sort of problem.
As the Nation daily wryly noted, the 15% rule has business owners "gripped by fear" because not
too many businessmen want to invest in something in which
they have no control. With Thailand's stock market falling to
new lows, the baht weak and getting weaker, looking for money without political
strings attached is a tall order
indeed.
†
Given the cash-strapped
realities of post-bubble Thailand, the restless bottom line of the media
business is being allowed to wag the dog.
Editorial independence and integrity are under attack, not from the
military’s command room, but from the boardroom of big business.
†
Thepchai Yong, a former
editor of the Nation, (and younger brother of press magnate Suthichai) led the
iTV news team’s public attack on possible Shin Corporation ownership. He paid for his outspoken views by
being kicked out of the newsroom to take a seat by a window upstairs with the
men in suits, an effective demotion that led him to leave the company.
†
The Bangkok Post, although
it lacks the vested interest in television of the Nation Group, got involved in
the fray. "Keep our Media
Free of Meddlers," cried a mid-May Bangkok Post editorial, defending the
need for media independence by invoking the spirit of Black May. "Troops
were called in and a crackdown was ordered by the government, ostensibly to
restore peace and order.
During the week-long
stand-off leading up to the eventual brutal crackdown, people who tuned into
any of the five state-controlled television stations for first-hand, reliable
and accurate information were sadly disappointed."
†
†
THE BUREAUCRACY OF
FREQUENCY REGULATION
†
The Byzantine drafting and
selection process of the media reform bill goes something like this:
†
A committee of 17 is formed
with quotas of four members in each of four Fields with the military getting an
extra voice. The categories are national security, academia, media NGOs and
broadcast professionals. The committee then picks fourteen names whittled down
from a field of 56 and then 28. The committee of 17 then presents 14 names to
parliament where seven people will be chosen to form the powerful new
regulatory body.
Promulgated to law in
March 2000, the frequency regulation bill stipulates that two commissions, one
for telecom, the other for broadcasting, must be vetted and submitted to
parliament for approval by the end of 2000. So the heat is on.
†
THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
BILL
†
The Telecommunications
Bill has moved forward in committee faster than the Broadcast Bill, in part
because it involves technical issues that don’t evoke memories of past
political crackdowns. Nonetheless,
high stakes are involved, especially when the leading candidate for Prime
Minister is the richest telecommunications tycoon in the region, as†the new
committee is designed to regulate the lucrative telecommunications sector of
phone lines, fibre optics and internet business.
†
“If passed into law,
corruption will be legalized," says Rossana Tositrakul, criticizing the
hastily approved the Telecommunications Bill in the Nation. Anuparp Thiralarp of Mahidol's College
of Management echoes that concern, saying the move from state to private
control is “scary.”
†
The astronomical amount of
cash at stake has critics worried in this corruption-ridden society. Despite
critical voices in the press, the Telecommunications Bill got an easy ride from
the media compared to the broadcast bill.
†
THE BROADCAST BILL
†
Television is an emotional
topic in Thailand. Selecting the selection committee has proved to be a
difficult task given all the quibbling that is going on. Various interest groups claim they are
uniquely and exclusively entitled to have more say than their rivals. This Orwellian reaction, in which some
behave as if they are more equal than others, has lead creating endless delays
in the scripting of the Broadcast Bill and the selection of the regulatory
committee.
†
The money and influence at
stake with the both the airwaves and electromagnetic spectrum are enormous, and
growing exponentially in this digital age, which helps explain the intense
competition among those who want a piece of the action.
†
As Anuwat Chinphririya,
the President of TV Cameramen and Reporters Association argued in the Nation,
"broadcast reform is starting to mimic the first and final voyage of the
Titanic." Media
professionals, he continued, are “trying to break the stranglehold that media
owners and the military have had on the airwaves for the past five
decades."
†
In September, as the
debate on the broadcast bill got increasingly acrimonious, the 1996
media-related murder of Sangchai Sunthornvut, made the front pages again. A
former Forestry Department official turned gangster was arrested, confessing to
involvement in the case. Sangchai, the former director of MCOT (Mass
Communications Organization of Thailand) was reportedly ordered killed by
Thawee Puttachana, a former Chiang Rai Minister of Parliament now on death row,
because of a conflict of interests over the lucrative leasing of radio to
commercial interests. Fearful of such conflict, radio stations supported by the
Public Relations Department have all but banned commercials.
†
The move to democratize
access and control of the media has unfortunately resulted in a stampede by
powerful players to grab a piece of the action in the name of the people. What
can we expect as the men in green graciously bow out, replaced by gray-suited
tycoons of the corporate boardrooms?
†
“Article 40 of new
constitution states broadcast/telecoms must be of benefit to public but the under
the new bill "only rich and powerful stand to benefit," says Amornrat
Mahitthirook in the Bangkok Post.
†
As the rains subside here
in Thailand, it looks like the “power-to-the-people” constitution will be
observed, in a twisted bureaucratic way, to the letter by those with the
biggest war chests and the best legal departments. The result is as soggy and swampy as the rain-swollen
landscape which is to say there is not a level playing field in sight.
†
MORE GOOD NEWS FROM PUBLIC
RELATIONS?
†
The government will remain
the biggest single broadcaster in Thailand, with control of Bangkok’s Channel
11 along with eight regional TV stations, and some 140 radio stations, and it
will be subject to less scrutiny than private stations.
†
The Council of State
responds that the broadcasts done by the public relations department need no
watchdog oversight as it is supervised by the "government, which, in turn,
is controlled by parliament and the people."
†
In a special Page One
comment entitled Media Bill a Dictator’s Guidebook, the August 28 Nation argued
that the bill will give the National Broadcasting Commission the power to
unilaterally censor any radio or television programme."
†
In contrast to the cooling
monsoon rains and sudden squalls, the debate about the future of Thailand’s
media has been hot and stuffy. Due to ambiguous guidelines and bureaucratic†
backpedaling, the freshly reformed media is looking more and more like the old
one, only more so.
†
Avant-garde artist Vasan
Sitthiket puts it this way, "it's not about democracy, which is sharing
power, it's about keeping power, and I call that "demon-crazy."
†
Thai newspapers, despite
the bruising setbacks of coups, shootings, bombings, libel suits and shutdowns
along the way, have emerged as a vital and courageous voice for Thai democracy,
helping the nation to move out of the shadow of past tragedies.
†
Poets, singers, artists
and writers who remember the darkness before dawn under various military
regimes continue invoke the memory of
"Black May," and the two “Red” Octobers, to remind everyone
how important it is to be vigilant about democracy and freedom.
†
pc
†
