[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
BKK POST: Manipulating consent
- Subject: BKK POST: Manipulating consent
- From: suriya@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 22:53:00
Bangkok Post March 27, 1998
Manipulating
consent, Thai-style
MEDIA: The PTT's heavy promotion of
its controversial Yadana gas pipeline
project through has raised questions
about media ethics. It appears the
"watchdog" may have turned a blind
eye on certain occasions to avoid
offending advertisers
Supara Janchitfah and Vasana Chinvarakorn
Amidst the economic gloom and doom - with at least nine
publications already out of business in less than a year - any
source of income is clutched like a lifebuoy by the drowning Thai
media industry.
But some mass communications academics and journalists are
asking if revenue from certain sources may in fact be detrimental
to the principles and credibility of the profession.
The focus of their criticism is the Petroleum Authority of
Thailand's (PTT) heavy promotion of its controversial Yadana
gas pipeline project through the media.
"It's like carpet bombing, what the PTT's been doing. They go
into practically everything: radio, TV, newspapers," said
Associate Professor Dr Ubonrat Siriyuwasak of the Faculty of
Mass Communications, Chulalongkorn University, at a recent
discussion titled "Media Ethics in the Age of Capitalism: The
Case of Media Presentation of the Natural Gas Pipeline Project
in Kanchanaburi."
"Had we been able to do what they are doing, who knows what
the government's final decision might have been," said Piphob
Dhongchai, an opponent of the PTT project.
Mr Piphob was referring to the Chuan cabinet's resolution in
February to give the go-ahead to the PTT's installation of gas
pipelines through pristine forest, on condition that the PTT set up
a monitoring sub-committee and pay compensation to residents
affected by the project.
So what's the big deal? Haven't both parties been given equal
opportunity to voice their opinions to the public? Isn't the media
an open venue which anyone, with adequate resources, can
make use of?
Closer scrutiny by academics like Dr Ubonrat, however, reveals
a skewed representation of the dispute by the Thai media. It
appears the "watchdog" may have turned a blind eye on certain
occasions to avoid offending advertisers.
Ethical questions have also been raised as to whether a state
enterprise like the PTT is entitled to spend taxpayers' money to
boost the image of one of its projects.
Worse, many fear that the pipeline case may only be a prologue
to a much bleaker future for the Thai media. After liberating itself
from the censorship of a dictatorial regime, the media is now
facing a far more daunting oppressor in the form of big business
whose chains may prove harder to break - if it ever has the will
to do so.
PUBLIC INFORMATION VS PUBLIC RELATIONS
George Orwell wrote in 1984, his futuristic novel attacking
propaganda, that whoever controls the present controls the past,
and whoever controls the past controls the future.
As accountability is now deemed vital to the successful
implementation of large-scale projects, the media has become
the battlefield for the "control" of public opinion. For Dr
Ubonrat, the PTT case is only the latest skirmish in a
long-running conflict.
"It reflects differences between two modes of belief: one
cherishes development, the other environment.
"The protest against the Nam Choan dam (in the 1980s) was a
feud between two sets of information fed to the public by the
Egat and the environmentalists respectively. During the
subsequent squabble over the Pak Moon dam, the agency in
charge bought a lot of ad space in newspapers to promote the
project," the Chula professor said.
A report by a panel chaired by former prime minister Anand
Panyarachun to investigate the gas pipeline project has chastised
the PTT for attempting to obscure certain important facts. It calls
into question the state enterprise's approach in selectively
providing the public with only positive information about the
project. In other words, public relations have been pursued at
the expense of dissemination of information to the public.
"Gas (pipeline project) is much, much different from shoes and
bags which can be advertised. This is a 'social project.' I am
puzzled at the way the PTT touts it around as if it were a
commodity," Dr Ubonrat continued.
The PTT is not the only state agency resorting to the mass media
to boost their image.
"A new tactic is to put up complimentary ads about their
organisation as a whole, instead of the typical attack pieces
against environmental groups. What you may call institutional
advertising. I haven't seen anyone complaining about such
practices though," noted Kamol Sukin, The Nation's
environmental reporter.
On the other hand, environmentalists complain that their room to
manoeuvre in putting their case to the public seems far more
constricted.
According to Mr Piphob, the provincial governor recently issued
a memorandum to all educational institutions in Kanchanaburi to
"watch out" for any individual or group trying to raise the issue of
the pipeline project on campus. Requests from opponents of the
project to present their case to students have been repeatedly
turned down.
More explicitly, Boonsong Chansongrassamee, a member of the
Kanchanaburi Conservation Group, cites the case of his peers'
clashes with the local media.
Despite previous camaraderie with the press when fighting
against political oppression or for social issues, Boonsong is now
discovering the overriding power of commercial interests.
"They all know us very well; we used to work alongside each
other. But since the PTT bought full-page ads from them, they
have changed their tune completely. Now they call us bad
people who are against the country's development, while all the
time printing information supplied by the PTT," the Kanchanaburi
native said.
FOCUS ON PROFIT AT EXPENSE OF NEWS
For a veteran journalist like Wanchai Tantiwitayapitak, presently
editor of Feature Magazine, the media's alignment with
whoever has money to spend on advertising is something we
may have to learn to live with.
"The listing of a few media groups on the stock market during
economic booms signified a new era where media became a
profit-oriented enterprise. Certain reports will be vetted prior to
publication to check whether it will affect their business.
"Scandals like the Salween logging case are simpler and easier to
deal with. Such news goes after individuals and doesn't challenge
the core of prevailing paradigms among policy makers," Mr
Wanchai said, giving his interpretation of what appears to be
insufficient coverage of the Yadana case in the Thai media.
A recent trend of former advertising staff taking over editor's
posts is also worrying Mr Wanchai. Although it is a fact of life
that newspapers survive less on circulation than on advertising
revenues, actual newsmaking experience is still theoretically a
crucial prerequisite for the captain of the information ship.
"Worse, some editors make presumptions about a particular
issue without ever leaving the office. Their articles are based
entirely on how they feel about the case," continued Wanchai,
himself having covered environmental issues for over a decade.
Undefined qualifications for editors parallels another recent
phenomenon wherein the distinction between news and
advertisements is becoming blurred. In a couple of instances,
newspaper ads may even take up more space than the editorial
coverage of the issue, according to Dr Ubonrat.
During the Anand-led panel review, academics strongly
disapproved of the way the PTT seemed to intentionally omit the
key word "advertisement" in a few of its daily presentations of the
public hearing, written by an anonymous "special reporter."
The addition of the word "advertisement" in subsequent ads,
following criticism, has also drawn fire for the very small type size
used, which may easily be overlooked by readers in a hurry.
For Mr Wanchai, the editor/
publisher is accountable for
whatever appears in print although
advertisers can choose where and
how to place publicity about
themselves.
A case of "media bombardment" is
relatively new in Thailand, but Dr
Ubonrat mentioned a case in the
United States which could serve as
an example for the Thai media. A
few years ago, a publisher was sued
for not accepting an ad. The court
decided that the media company
does have the ultimate right to select
what is going to appear into their
product.
According to Supaporn Pho-kaew,
also from Chula's Faculty of Mass
Communications, the practice may
have violated regulations by the
National Press Council (NPC) that
prohibit any form of misleading
advertising.
Article 19 of the draft Regulations on Press Ethics (1998) states
that any text appearing in newspaper advertisements must have a
clear display of its status as an ad. Disguising it in the form of a
news report or opinion piece is prohibited.
The rules are, unfortunately, undergoing revision. A recent case
showed that the guidelines are still not clear.
When a non-governmental organisation called the Media
Consumer Group tried to bring up an issue over publishers'
responsibility for ads appearing in their publications, they were
told to file complaints to each individual newspaper first and see
what response they got.
"Only then are we allowed to consider the option of moving the
case up to the council. It's still up in the air whether the
complainant has to be the directly injured party or not, even
though I believe the issue does have wider ramifications on public
policies," said an exasperated Ms Supaporn.
At present, the Mass Communications professors at Chula and
the Sueb Foundation are planning to submit an official petition to
the NPC.
QUALITY OF REPORTERS AN ISSUE
The quality of reporters is probably the most influential factor in
this business of channelling information to the public. Here,
opinions differ over levels of performance.
Ms Supaporn pointed to a lack of attention to key issues among
certain media personnel, particularly those in the electronic media,
which may cause misunderstanding among the audience.
The Chula lecturer cited the case of a TV programme about a
group of supporters of the pipeline project who started camping
in the forest following the arrest and removal of Sulak Sivarak
and other protesters.
"In one scene, a village headman is quoted saying that he was
concerned that if the construction missed the July deadline, we
would have to pay a hefty fine. During the public hearing a few
weeks ago, we all learned that the truth is otherwise. The PTT
will be committed to pay only the interest, not the fine.
"So why did the producers still show that quote? Weren't they
aware of the facts, or was this intentional?" asked the professor.
Mr Boonsong from the Kanchanaburi Conservation Group also
has doubts about the way his group has been portrayed by some
sections of the media. Maltreatment is not uncommon, especially
when dealing with local staff. Editing and juxtaposition of
information, however, cause him more concern.
"Once I gave an interview to a TV crew for over half an hour. I
told them all about the ecological impact of the project. When it
was broadcast, the only thing that came out was our uttering '(We
will) fight on.' All the while, the PTT has ample air time to
elaborate on the advantages of the project. How can people who
watch it understand where we're coming from?"
On the other hand, Suraphol Duangkae, director of the Wildlife
Fund Thailand Foundation, said the audience themselves must be
alert to keep up with developments.
"The environmental reporters I've dealt with so far are of high
quality. Ironically, the audience, even highly-educated people, are
often quite ignorant about what's transpiring.
"For example, my friends saw me appearing on TV (testifying at
the gas pipeline project hearing), but didn't have a clue what it
was all about. Another time they asked me how come the
environmentalists could mobilise tens of thousands of people. It
turned out they were talking about the mob that came out to
support the project," said the long-time campaigner for
environmental conservation.
BYPASSING THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY?
Even when reporters do fulfill their duty, the prevailing power
structure in society may limit how far they can exercise their
gatekeeping and agenda-setting roles.
Mr Piphob raised the issue of difficulty to access public
information, a perennial sore point despite being sanctioned by
the new Constitution in Article 58 (see story this page).
Pairote Pholpot of the Union for Civil Liberties, an NGO
advocating human rights protection, is skeptical about the
effectiveness of such laws.
"Article 41 stipulates that media staff can contradict their
superiors in how they work. But I wonder, when it comes to
practice, how many will really feel assured by the promise?"
asked the lawyer.
On the other hand, Mr Kamol of The Nation newspaper says
reporters in his organisation still enjoy a relative degree of
freedom of expression, even though his company has some
business contact with the PTT.
He admits, though, that internal politics affects every news
organisation, which somehow interferes with the editing process.
"Some of the news editors have no experience in environmental
reportage. So it is very hard for them to understand certain
issues."
For those who continue to go against the mainstream, though, the
current economic downturn means their future is bleak.
Piyanat Worasiri, managing editor of an alternative political
weekly titled Arthit, shares her frustration.
"I do understand those who accept the PTT offers. They have to
struggle to survive. Those who want to maintain their ethics and
idealism may not be able to. Just look at my magazine, for
instance. We may soon have to close down partly because of our
firm stance," Ms Piyanat said.
And yet a string of groups and individuals are coming up with
alternative, though narrower, routes of information flow.
Environmental reporters, for example, are building up an internet
network where they can share information considered
unpublishable in print format. Those outside the news world can
also create their own versions of independent media that allow
them to voice their side of the story.
"Each of us may have to be communicators in our own right," said
Supinya Klang-narong of the Thai Volunteer Services Foundation
(TVS). "It isn't wise to place trust and hope on the state or the
private sector. Small people have long been ignored by the
(mainstream) media. If there is no outlet for them to voice out
opinions and concerns, one day, the steam will burst out."
This report is based on a seminar held by Chulalongkorn
University's Faculty of Mass Communications, the Sueb
Nakasathien Foundation, and Thai Development Support
Committee (TDSC) on March 19. The organisers invited
representatives from the PTT and other Thai language
newspapers but they did not show up.
Constitutional rights relating to media freedom
Article 39: Every person has freedom of expression, speech,
writing, printing, advertising and any other method of
communication.
Article 4O: Radio, television and telecommunication waves
(frequencies) are public resources and are allocated by an
independent state body.
Article 41: Employees of both public and private media
organisations have the freedom to present news reports. They
cannot be manipulated by the state or media owners, state
agencies and state enterprises. But this should not be conflict with
professional ethics.
Article 58: Individuals have the right to seek information and
explanations from the state before projects that may affect them
or their communities are approved.
© The Post Publishing Public Co., Ltd. All rights reserved 1998
Contact the Bangkok Post
Web Comments: Webmaster
Last Modified: Fri, Mar 27, 1998