Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha has dismissed reports of his weekly talk show, which was on air for five years during his time at the helm of the National Council of Peace and Order (NCPO), making a comeback.
Gen Prayut denied media reports that the programme might be brought back at the request of PM's Office Minister Tewan Liptapallop, who oversees the Public Relations Department.
The premier said The Prime Minister Meets the People programme will not return. However, he said he may address the nation about important issues from time to time but he would try to keep national broadcasts to a minimum.
The decision prompted a mixed reaction from both sides of the political spectrum, some of whom were not so fond of watching the premier speak his mind and convey his thoughts to people every Friday evening.
However, a mass media specialist from Thammasat University said reviving the programme might help the prime minister's popularity rating. However, to date, no opinion poll has been conducted to measure the correlation between Gen Prayut's solo talk show and his approval rating.
The expert said the programme -- which began airing shortly after the now-defunct NCPO staged the May 2014 military coup and ended before the current government took office -- was a one-way communication tool which, in theory, should have delivered a propagandist effect. But not when some people decided to switch off their televisions.
Viewers did not have much choice when the programme was broadcast as the majority of TV and radio stations carried it. It boiled down to either riding it out or turning off your set.
The media specialist said the programme might have been better received and attracted a broader following if Gen Prayut had modified the show's format by making it shorter and, most importantly, sticking to the single biggest attention-grabbing current affairs issue of the week. Instead, he delved into multiple subjects that never seemed to "bottom out".
A shorter and more concise format would have pulled in rather than pushed away his viewers.
The expert said the previous government had missed a precious opportunity to win more support when it had unrivalled broadcasting power at its disposal.
Some critics said Gen Prayut should have been more tactful in managing the amount and flow of messages he threw at the public during his first term as prime minister. He might, for example, have given fewer interviews to reporters during the week and saved a certain, critical portion of what he wished to flesh out for his Friday broadcast.
The media expert added that if the format had been rejigged and made more interesting, it would have helped Gen Prayut's image and his popularity.
Pareena: 'Victim' of cyberbullying
Bombings spark defamation spat
The Aug 2 bomb explosions in Bangkok and Nonthaburi have set the rumour mill abuzz with some observers suggesting the blasts might have been politically motivated.
The attacks, apparently designed to cause panic rather than inflict mass casualties, took place after Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha relinquished his special powers under Section 44 as a result of the dissolution of the National Council for Peace and Order.
The timing also aroused suspicion that they were meant to embarrass the government which was hosting a high-profile Asean meeting attended by reporters from foreign media outlets.
Following the blasts, Gen Prayut said that no bombings had occurred during his first five-year term as prime minister after the coup. "Why did they occur during the Asean foreign ministers' meeting?" the prime minister was quoted as asking.
With political violence not far behind and still haunting a lot of people, political motives received overwhelming attention when the explosions rocked the capital, according to political observers.
Even so, there are many "whodunit" theories; some believe a certain group sought to incite chaos while others think the attacks were staged to smear political rivals. The debate is likely to continue in this manner until the police solve the mystery.
While the authorities work to determine the motive behind the blasts, two controversial MPs -- Future Forward's Pannika Wanich and Palang Pracharath Party's Pareena Kraikupt -- are trading accusations and filing defamation complaints against each other over the attacks.
In a lawsuit lodged with the Criminal Court by FFP spokeswoman Pannika Wanich, Ms Pareena, the controversial MP for Ratchaburi, is accused of posting a message on Facebook implying FFP leader Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and Ms Pannika were linked to the explosions.
The FFP lawsuit against Ms Pareena was said to be triggered by her Facebook post a few days after the incidents. The controversial post, which has since been removed, is also said to include photos implying that the FFP members may have been involved.
According to Ms Pannika, also an FFP party-list MP, the legal action against the Ratchaburi MP was lodged to set a precedent over disseminating fake news rather than seek compensation or punishment against the government MP. She insisted the party has evidence to support its charge against Ms Pareena despite the controversial content having been removed.
Ms Pareena, in response, filed a defamation complaint with Lumpini police against Ms Pannika who, in comments made to reporters, accused her of causing disunity in society. Ms Pareena countered that it is she who is the victim of fake news and cyberbullying.
According to political observers, the accusations against the FFP appear to be unfair based on the police investigation and those trying to link the party to the incidents might run afoul of the defamation law.
In his latest press conference on Thursday, national police chief Chakthip Chaijinda admitted that it was an uphill task to determine who was behind the blasts and what the real motive was, even though suspects had provided some useful information.
Nine people have been detained including two men who were nabbed last Friday while travelling in a passenger van to Narathiwat province from Bangkok. The pair were accused of planting two bombs in front of the police headquarters in Pathumwan district and charged in connection with criminal association, possession of explosives and attempted murder.
Srisuwan: Wants court ruling on oath
Pressure mounts over oath gaffe
Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha is coming under pressure and critics are after his scalp over his not completing the oath of office during last month's cabinet swearing-in ceremony.
The premier on Thursday apologised to cabinet ministers over the oath issue, saying his worry now was how to ensure the government can function. He also said he would take "sole responsibility", which prompted speculation that the prime minister was hinting at resigning over the issue.
"I had no intention of doing it wrongly. Let's focus on the intention," the prime minister said during his visit to the southern province of Yala on Wednesday.
Government spokeswoman Narumon Pinyosinwat attempted to quash the speculation, saying the premier has already come up with a way around the problem.
The Office of the Ombudsman decided on Tuesday to examine the legitimacy of the cabinet's oath, in response to a petition from activist Srisuwan Janya.
The activist asked the Ombudsman to forward the issue to the Constitutional Court or the Administrative Court for a ruling on the legitimacy of the government as a result of the incomplete oath made before His Majesty the King on July 16.
Mr Srisuwan filed his complaint on Monday, questioning whether the last sentence being missed out from the oath Gen Prayut read out for cabinet ministers to repeat constituted a breach of Section 161 of the constitution.
He accused the prime minister of not heeding the constitution and jeopardising the legitimacy of the government.
Observers noted that the petition seeking a ruling on the issue will set a precedent. Whichever way the ruling goes, the government will be required to comply with the ruling.
However, if the ruling is in favour of Gen Prayut, this will help cement the government's legitimacy and defuse the pressure from the opposition, according to observers.
In reciting the oath, Gen Prayut omitted to vow to uphold and abide by the constitution, which is the final paragraph in Section 161 of the charter.
Critics say this could render his cabinet illegitimate and unable to perform its duties. The opposition has also latched onto the issue to put pressure on the prime minister and invalidate the government.
Future Forward Party secretary-general and list-MP Piyabutr Saengkanokkul brought the oath issue to light during the recent parliamentary debate on the government's policy manifesto.
Seri Ruamthai Party leader Pol Gen Sereepisuth Temeeyaves earlier called on Gen Prayut and cabinet ministers to seek a royal pardon and correct the mistake.
"The government should suspend its work and not carry out duties until it makes the matter right," he said.
The Pheu Thai-led opposition is also seeking to grill Gen Prayut over the omission in the House of Representatives.
Pheu Thai MP for Maha Sarakham Suthin Khlangsaeng said that if Gen Prayut cannot clear doubts before the House, the opposition may table a no-confidence motion against the government.