The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission's (NBTC) order for red shirt-affiliated Peace TV to stop broadcasting and the decision by Naewna newspaper to withdraw from the National Press Council of Thailand have highlighted an increasingly testing time for journalism in Thailand.
It is at a time like this, however, that media professionals must rise to the challenge and prove to the public they can still fulfil their duties fairly as society's watchdogs.
There is no doubt the landscape is murky. Political conflicts that have enthralled the country for years have also caused deep divisions and fragmentation in every group. The media are no exception. Indeed, the media, whether they are professionals or amateurs, have been an integral part of the conflicts and some could be blamed for the deadly results.
Questions about media bias and impartiality resounded as soon as the latest round of political conflicts was broken up. Certain outlets have merely served as propaganda machines for the political groups that set them up.
The May 22, 2014 coup clouded the media landscape further. The presence of the military regime has brought up the dilemma of dictatorship versus democracy. In a show of how fragmented society has become, most mainstream media are subjected to accusations from different groups whether they show a pro-coup agenda or harbour anti-coup bias. Even in this situation where journalistic standards have been put to question and professionalism has become increasingly debatable, one principle should still stand. That is there should be no censorship of the media by the state.
The closure of Peace TV by power of the authoritarian Section 44 is a case in point. It is true the channel is a propaganda arm of the red-shirt United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), a major party in the political conflict. The channel can even be accused of spewing a one-sided agenda against the military regime. In fact, it is fighting one such case at the Supreme Court.
The case dates back to April 30 last year when the NBTC permanently revoked the station's licence for violating its licensing terms and the junta's orders on broadcasting.
Under the Broadcasting Act, the NBTC can halt or revoke the licences of broadcasters if they air content that seeks to overthrow the constitutional monarchy, threatens national security or morality, constitutes profanity or harms people's mental or physical health.
Meanwhile, the order from the regime that Peace TV has been accused of violating bans criticism of the NCPO and content deemed instigating conflicts or causing divisions within society. Peace Television Co, the station's operation, petitioned the Central Administrative Court against the revocation.
In July last year, the court issued a temporary injunction against the NBTC's closure order, which allowed the station to continue broadcasting. The regulator appealed against the injunction to the Supreme Administrative Court which has yet to rule on the case. It would have been better for the NCPO to let the justice process run its own course instead of resorting to the repressive gagging order.
The resignation of Naewna newspaper from membership of the National Press Council of Thailand (NPCT), citing the press body's inability to live up to its principles of media self-monitoring, will deal another blow to the media profession. Although Naewna's complaints could ring true both among journalists and the public, it should never give way to an interpretation that state censorship is a preferable form of media control.
The challenges for the Thai media are mounting but the Press Council and journalists have no choice but to work harder to show the public they can uphold their principles and professionalism.