When anti-government protesters stormed television stations to demand they broadcast news and pronouncements coming out of their gathering, their actions were roundly denounced as media intimidation.
As a result, protest leaders were widely criticised as having an authoritarian bent even as they were purportedly fighting for democracy.
Nevertheless, the protesters' action did bring out into the open a phenomenon in the media world that many people have for some time observed with great concern. This is a phenomenon where many media outlets are believed to have come under the ruling Pheu Thai Party's influence.
As the anti-government protest started gathering steam, the lack of coverage by the major television stations was noticeable. Many people criticised it as a transparent effort to please the government.
Media Monitor, a media watchdog website, reported that its monitoring of television broadcasts on Nov 12-15 found that of all the free-to-air stations, public broadcaster ThaiPBS devoted the most time to reporting protest activities at 15% of air time, followed by Channel 3 at 8%. Coverage by the rest of the stations was abysmal considering the import of the event, with Channels 7 and 9 both spending 4%, Channel 11 at 3%, and Channel 5 coming in last at 2%.
In contrast, satellite TV news stations were found to have devoted much more coverage in general, with as much as 32% of air time for Spring News.
Channel 11, of course, serves as the mouthpiece of any party controlling government power at the time.
Channel 9 is operated by Mcot Plc, a state-owned public broadcaster. It is supposed to be a professional news organisation, operating with impartiality. In reality, operations are always kept within reach by the ruling politicians, and board directorship is treated as a political award.
In the past, politicians tried not to be too brazen with their interference with Mcot. At the very least, the appointment of the Mcot president was left to the selection committee to recommend someone possessing impeccable credentials and media experience.
But now even this top executive position has become a political cake. The selection of Anek Permvongseni as the current president has raised many eyebrows for his lack of media experience. Before accepting the Mcot top job, Mr Anek served as secretary-general of the Education Council.
Thaksin Shinawatra, himself a marketing guru, understands well the power of the media and has always aspired to gain dominance over major media outlets. His attempts to dominate the media during his reigns of power changed the media landscape.
The Thai media, ever proud of its tradition of serving as the people's voice against state oppression, has found itself fractured and used as a political tool.
With the Thai Rak Thai Party that he founded and its subsequent incarnations in control of the government, Thaksin was able to assert effective control over the media by using public relations budgets of government agencies. In at least one case, his allies have been able to take over control of a major newspaper and change its editorial makeup.
Thaksin's attempts to dominate the media are a direct assault on media freedom and on freedom of public expression.
The divisiveness he inflicted on the media world inevitably hurt the media's effectiveness in representing the voices of the masses.
Most insidiously, it has deprived the country of a public forum where different opinions may be expressed, discussed and argued about in a civilised manner. Now news and opinions published or broadcast by a media outlet are viewed with another layer of suspicion by its audience depending on the political glasses they wear.
The current political crisis, however, provides a rare opportunity to introduce real media reform and to examine the role of government in the media. The purpose should be to ensure that the media serves the public rather than corporate interests and that the government keeps its hand off the media.
One of the areas requiring serious attention is media ownership. Media outlets have increasingly become major business operations, with business interests outweighing the responsibility to provide public news and information.
The balance of interests should be restored. How to do it is a matter for public discussion, but the aim should be to ensure editorial independence and integrity while still accommodating business concerns.
On the government's side, rules should be placed on public spending for propaganda purposes. Spending of budgets for public relations or public information, whatever name it is called, should be restricted to dissemination of public information and promotion of public transparency.
Spending for politicians' self-promotion should be strictly prohibited. There is no need to place a minister's face on giant billboards advertising his ministry's projects or campaigns, for instance. Neither is there a need for the prime minister's face to appear on all these billboards.
Indeed there is no need for spending on billboard advertisement, itself a form of visual pollution. Government ministers have the media at their beck and call if they have relevant information to impart.
The operations of the two state-owned broadcast arms, Mcot and the National Broadcasting Services of Thailand (NBT) under the Public Relations Department, should be reviewed and reformed to ensure they serve the public interest rather than acting as the government's mouthpieces.
NBT's Channel 11 recently came under fire for not broadcasting House meetings to discuss important bills, including the amnesty bill which led to the current crisis. A reform plan should include a provision to turn it into a public broadcaster with a specific function to broadcast as many parliamentary meetings, including those of major committees, as possible.
These are only some of the steps to take to restore professionalism and integrity to media operations. The media is too important to be left to politicians' manipulation.
Wasant Techawongtham is former news editor, Bangkok Post. He is currently a freelance writer and editorial director of Milky Way Press, a publishing house.