LET IT BE
SURANAND VEJJAJIVA
Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States of America and considered one of the forefront thinkers of modern democracy, was quoted as saying: "The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object is to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them."
Jefferson believed that an enlightened citizen, well-informed and educated through a free press, is essential in protecting liberty and democracy.
Though in actuality he suffered from harsh criticisms which he felt were abuses and false allegations by the press during his administration, to the point that "as for what is not true, you will always find in abundance in newspapers"; however, for Jefferson, "public duties more urgent press on time of public servants, and the offenders have therefore been left to find their punishment in the public indignation".
Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej could have learnt that particular democratic leadership lesson. He certainly is not the first elected leader to have to face press criticism, an essential part of a working democracy and self-government, and he will not be the last.
And because he came to power in a period after an 18-month absence of democracy, he has a unique opportunity to correct the wrongs and ensure that a working democracy is put on the right path for Thailand again.
Disappointingly, it seems that he has chosen a different path, as he has been lashing out at the press since he entered office. His comments, especially through his regular radio talk show on Sundays, have antagonised the press and the general public, putting him in the hot seat which has culminated in a strong statement of disapproval issued by members of the Thai press and academics on May 3, 2008.
In a way, I do actually empathise with PM Samak, and members of the press please bear with me.
The Thai press, you have to admit, has a tendency to dramatise news. Newspapers, newsbreaks on radios at the beginning of the hour, TV/radio news/talk shows, and short messaging (SMS) service directly to your mobiles, tend to minimise the substance of news into sound bites and colourful headlines.
This dramatised bombardment, if you may call it that, fits the busy modern capitalist way of life, but leaves modern Thais not as well-informed as they should be. A lot of information is being put out but people are aware only of what they can hear and what catches the eye in short bursts.
Much of the reported news does not separate facts from opinion. Some are based purely on "sources", which leaves readers or listeners wondering whether those "sources" check out. Hardly do you see "straight news" type of shows on TV, as you only see TV personalities mixing news with their personal opinions, reporting as if they know all the truth and that what they are reporting is the truth.
At the same time, popular Thai newspapers are a mixture of serious news and tabloid-type dramatised news. This type of presentation certainly "sells" newspapers or even commercials on radio and TV. You cannot help but doubt how much substance and fact reported are taken into account by the public when an important piece of news is reported alongside a piece about how people are interpreting the appearance of a two-headed snake for luck in the next lottery draw.
I am not going to criticise columnists on their writing, no matter how biased or polarising their opinions are, since they ultimately will be responsible for their words. So is the way in which many media houses have taken a strong political position, one way or another.
The worrying point for me, however, is in the so-called new media. Today many websites present unedited points of view with hard-core fans posting their strong-worded opinions leading to polarisation on many issues. The anonymity of the writers lessens the accountability factor, and thus many of the articles appear to be a mixture of truths and lies.
Of course, President Jefferson in the 18th century could not have anticipated all these technological advances, since there was then only the printing press; but to put it in his terms, when taking all the factors I have mentioned into consideration, today's Thai public is not "well read". An uninformed public, either through lack of attention or a reactive tendency to believe all that is reported, rightly or wrongly, can be easily manipulated. And polarisation on conflicting issues is usually the result, as has occurred in recent years.
When that happens, confrontation ensues, with each party disregarding the other's rights and liberties. That is why at present Thai democracy is in the doldrums.
It is thus understandable that PM Samak can feel frustrated. But whatever its faults, a free press is still an essential pillar of self-government. The good part is that the Thai press is considered relatively free. Of course, improvements and reform must be worked upon and it is the general public that will give the final judgement on the press. The press, being imperfect, does not constitute an excuse for a politician, especially one that is an elected prime minister, to lash out at.
A politician does not have that privilege. He or she must answer to the public either directly or indirectly through the press; the press will ask questions in the name of the general public, checking and balancing the politician's ambitions.
That is why public figures must learn to communicate. A politician, especially one that has risen to the leadership ranks, has to operate through various conflicting interests. So, to get results he must communicate well. And communication skills come in two dimensions.
First is the ability to speak in simple terms and make the audience understand what is being said. Understanding and believing are, of course, different; but to speak well is an essential skill. This is not a problem for PM Samak. He has survived and thrived politically because of his one-way communication and by being able to speak faster and louder than others.
On the other hand, however, there is also the listening skill, which is an equally important tool of communication in convincing people and finding solutions to problems. Not only would you be able to know who thinks what, but letting the conflicting parties air their grievances, is a solution in itself. Often in political debate people just want to be heard.
It is thus in PM Samak's best interests to readjust his attitude toward the press. His current seclusion from the press, although calming the nerves of many, does not resolve the enduring bad feelings. He should hear out the press, let the press be and say whatever it wants. Do not take it personally, as the media will have to face their "punishment in public indignation" if the public sees unfair or biased opinions.
At the same time, he should not use his radio address as a tool of personal vengeance. He could use it to inform the public of his policies and decisions in clear and simple terms, which he is good at. An informed public will be his best supporters and the media will be happy to carry his message around.
PM Samak must also get his team together. His communications team, starting with Minister Jakrapob Penkair, and both the government and party spokesmen, must work in coordination. They must take their share of work, answering tough questions and deflecting political attacks. I never think that the press is out to get the government. Certainly, there are some other circles that do. But most Thais have no desire for a dead-end democracy. No one wants another coup, certainly not one inflamed by the press or, for that matter, by the prime minister himself.
PM Samak therefore should not be the centre of the conflict nor become the catalyst in generating a confrontation himself. He must realise that running a country and a political party is not a one-man show. Of course, he is a confident man, surviving the Thai political scene with his words as his weapon of survival. Now, at the pinnacle of his career, he must avoid using his words as a weapon to his own destruction. For in the end, he has nothing to fear, as Jefferson would say: "The man who fears no truths has nothing to fear from lies."
The writer is co-founder of the Puea Pandin party and a former member of the Thaksin Shinawatra Cabinet
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Next
