A small lesson in Thai culture…

Yesterday evening, there was a again a discussion by the Foreign Correspondence Club of Thailand (FCCT) with the topic “Thailand in the Eyes of Others” – How does foreign media see Thailand.

Guests were:

– Dr Sumet Jumsai – Architect, artist and social commentator
– Kraisak Choonhavan – Deputy Chairman of the Democrat Party, former senator and expert in foreign relations
– Pana Janviroj – Chief Operating Officer of the Nation Group
– Somtow Sucharitkul – Composer, author and social commentator

(see program here)

The panel started with Somtow who was the most moderate of the four. He began by expressing his anger about the balance of foreign reporting and why Thai people are offended by it. Then, he gave three reasons why people think articles are biased or wrong:

• personality of journalists (dumb, paid,…)
• cultural bias (they don’t get the core of the conflict)
• “war of revisionism” (only propaganda by Thaksin)

On a funny note: He sounded exactly like the character Stewie of the cartoon series Family Guy. Couldn’t stop thinking about that 🙂

The next speaker was Sumet. He is a “veteran” artist and architect and very well respected in Thailand. For myself, I have to say that I rather disliked him since he was very offending and cynical, making jokes about everything and everyone. His speech in the beginning contained mostly jokes about the foreign journalists who he thought are stupid and only meeting in Soi Cowboy (red light). He, then, talked about the red shirts and their behaviour of starting the violence or using children as shields (This really happened when one father held his baby on the barricades with soldiers on the other side  and it was widely exploited by the media, however, only one example of a stupid father). One of his best comments was that not even the Nazis would have done these things (big uproar). What would the world be without the Nazis? No one to compare with…In the end he said, he hated all the academics who romanticise the red movement and don’t see it as the violent mob.

Kraisak, the MP of the Democrats which lead the government, came next.I just give his ideas in bullet points since not much to analyse there, only that he was very cynical…

• He gave an example that he was called several times in the middle of the night by foreign journalists who asked him why is your government controlled by the military. Then getting angry about all the ignorant journalists as of course the government was not installed by the military.
• He shifted then to the military massacres in the South done by the Thaksin government.
• Declined the last FCCT invitation since the reds were camping outside and he was sure they would have lynched him.
• Thaksin put two oil trucks at Ding Daeng to blow them up.
• No one mentioned that everything happened shortly after the government froze the money of Thaksin.
• Reds thought that this is a romantic revolution.
• Made fun of journalists who don’t speak Thai and couldn’t understand the speeches on the stage which were only violent talk.
• Complained about the roadmap of Abhisit because debates with reds could have only resulted in violence and he would not run an election campaign in the North were he would be “shot by M79”.
• About Seh Daeng: he was a gangster, no loss since there are enough Generals, nobody admits that he was a red shirt
• No fan of Abhisit either since he couldn’t handle conflicts like war on drugs or war in the South

Pana, CEO of the conservative Nation Newspaper. I found him a bit boring and he lost me many times in his speeches I have to admit. He talked about the Western press which doesn’t sympathize with the Thai people and where only democratic values count. This whole conflict is a proxy war by Thaksin and Thai educated people are not stupid and see the cause of inequality. Thailand is a failed state since the police doesn’t work and all the military can do is shoot.

Then the Q/A session followed and the discussion drifted a bit into a ridiculous mess but as always the questions are more important than the answers.

Q. Are foreign journalists biased? They were at the front line while Thai journalists were “playing soap opera”

The panel was evading the question, sure that in the end Thai journalists reported from the scenes.

Q (by member of Swedish embassy): 1766 Freedom of Speech was introduced in Sweden. This right doesn’t exist to protect the opinion of the government or the political correct opinion. Comment?

Now followed the most hilarious and then in my eyes the only useful comment of the whole evening.

Sumet: “You have free sex in Skandinavia as well” (why was he that offending?). Then he compared freedom of expression to a painter pissing on Jesus and only the Muslim complained as Jesus was also his prophet. (that was a comment on Twitter by _bm concerning this comment: “you can be upset at the free sex quote, but if the only thing you see from a western country are copulating backpacker … #nosurprise” )

Somtow instead sincerely commented on the fact that a country needs all opinions to be heard that the citizens can form their own opinion.

Q: It is the Thai elite preconception that no farang (foreigner) can understand the Thai culture. Comment?

Somtow: He is a victim of that preconception since he lived mostly in foreign countries. (I thought at that point that Abhisit is also very western. Does he understand it then?)

Q: Was CNN and other foreign media incapable of doing their job? If yes, why are they still allowed to work in Thailand.

Panel can’t give a coherent answer to that one.

Q: If Thailand is so uniquely impenetrable for foreign media, how can Thai know about other countries?

Somtow: Who said it is?

Suddenly a new guy entered the stage and started talking about his own experience living in the area occupied by the red and that he has never seen anyone shoot a gun (the pictures and videos said different I’m afraid).

Q: English man lived among the red shirts and he heard only “hitleroesque” brainwashing on stage and a lot of guns and other weapons in the red camp. Why did no other reporter see that? (and why are there almost no pictures of that?)

Q: Complained about Thai media coverage and that Thai journalists spied out red camps for the military. (there was also a question about code of ethic…)

Q: Many Thais felt insulted and raped by the international coverage. Why has no Thai government ever addressed the topic of the international image of Thailand.

Q: How much money does Thaksin have.

With all these question which I thought interesting to hear, the panel was incoherent and lost me in the end. Still, in most of the comments, especially by Sumet or Kraisak, you could feel this hatred and cynical attitude towards the red and the foreign media.

That was the “small lesson in Thai culture” which showed how stuck the minds are on both sides (although no red speaker was on the panel). The conflict goes deeper and I, as a farang, who only studied Thailand and South East Asia only for a short while still has to learn a lot.

———————————————————————————–

[wer eine deutsche Übersetzung wünscht, melde sich bitte]