​T his week I received an email from the Head of the World Press Freedom Index Desk of the Reporters Without Borders, headquartered in Paris, inviting me to help in the survey for Thailand’s annual media freedom again. I have been invited for many consecutive years to take part in the survey, probably about a decade now, but this year is particularly challenging and requires careful consideration when giving an assessment and score.

​This is because, following the conflict and the five-day war between Thailand and Cambodia, a significant number of Thai (and Cambodian) media outlets chose to prioritise their identity as Thais (or Cambodians) above their role as media professionals, whose duty is to scrutinize and question those in power in society and the state, and to try to hold them accountable.

​Because a substantial number of Thai media outlets chose to view themselves first and foremost as part of “Team Thailand” and declared, “I love my nation too,” they willingly prioritised presenting news that they saw as beneficial to their country (in a myopic way). They turned a blind eye or played down certain negative news, such as the story of the Cambodian woman who illegally fled to Thailand and alleging she was raped by seven Thai soldiers, which was played down or reported on restrictively by the Thai media at present after the government says it was “fake news.”

​Moreover, earlier this week, the Navy Spokesman issued a statement “requesting cooperation from the media to refrain from disseminating false or misleading reports that may cause misunderstandings and unnecessary harm,” even though the Thai media could not verify the facts of this matter themselves. (Similarly, last week, the Cambodian media played down the correction and apology issued by the Malaysian state news agency, Bernama News Agency, regarding the mistranslation of the word “new mine” which was incorrectly rendered as “old mine.” My source in Cambodia confirmed to me this week that almost all Khmer media did not report this news.)

Another example of “Team Thailand journalism” is senior military-beat reporter Ms Vassana Na-nuam who has become almost like a unofficial but effective  military spokesperson. Two days ago she was interviewed by fellow Thai reporters saying things like: We must have confidence in the army. We must decisively and quickly defeat Cambodia in the war ohrwise the next military clash might be protracted. Cambodia is not standing still; they are buying new weapons from the Czech Republic and Poland although she added she doesn’t what these claimed new weapons are.

The report on Amarin TV where Vassana currently works for, after a long career at The Bangkok Post, stressed that Vassana had spoken to the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces.

This is the same Vassana whom before the 5-day war in July shared an AI-generated video clip of the Royal Thai Airforce fictitious attack on Phnom Penh.

​We can see that the Thai (and Cambodian) media’s choice to value their national identity above their duty to scrutinize those in power in society has led them to become part of the propaganda machine for ultra-nationalism, ready to accuse the opposing side of lying or stereotyping the entire population of the nation they consider an ‘enemy’ as being untrustworthy, or even inciting and instigating the use of military force again.

​In this sense, during a conflict between the role of the media and the identity of being a Thai, even if they have some degree of media freedom, they end up choosing to abandon the true duty as media professionals and abuse the media freedom they possess to produce propaganda that serves the dominant ultra-nationalist ideology.

​In the end, they may not be doing a service to even their own country that they profess to love so much as they are playing a crucial role in creating an uncritical society, and an uncritical society is a weak and vulnerable society.

​Performing the duties of an honest and truly professional journalist is at its core, an act of a true patriot. This is because it helps the public and society become strong, keep pace with the world affairs, and avoid them being easily manipulated or exploited.

​At a time when you insist on publicly disagreeing with the military and ultra-nationalists, you risk being branded as a Cambodian-sympathiser or more.

​Regarding those who, over the past few months, repeatedly accuse me of being a Thai journalist with a Khmer heart, of being Khmer, or desperately wanting to be Khmer, I wish to clarify as follows: This is a technique to create “the other” or marginalise dissenting Thai views as opposed to the hegemonic views of ultra-nationalist Thais and the policies of the military (and the Thai government) concerning how to handle the current Thai-Cambodian conflict.

​When they cannot counter or debate rationally about why they should care for foot soldiers who will have to die if another round of military confrontation breaks, or the needless suffering of people along the border both in Thailand and Cambodia and the avoidable economic impacts, as well as why we are turning our neighbour into our nemesis, they create hatred and push the narrative that dissenting Thai citizens are in fact the “enemy” or “Cambodians” in their eyes.

​49 years ago, Thai conservatives and ultra-nationalists accused the young protesters who gathered at Thammasat University of being “Vietnamese” (who were the enemies of the Thai state and a threat to the Monarchy at the time). This led to the savage massacre of October 6, 1976. Not only were students lynched, but some were raped, burned on rubber tyres, one had a slipper stuck into his lifeless body’s mouth, and their corpses were abused, all while cheering crowds watched in a frenzy of sadistic satisfaction. Thus, the terms “ultra-nationalist” and “monarchy-obsessed fanatics” are not rootless words or mere empty rhetoric in Thailand.

​49 years later, the ultra-nationalists are still here. A number of Thais are still using the same old methods, as if Thai society has learned nothing from its shameful past, showing little or no intellectual or social development in this regard.

​This is an attempt to suppress internal dissenting voices by forcing the entire nation to hold and express the same opinions on managing the Thai-Cambodian conflict. It is about painting those who deviate from the frantic mainstream as Khmer, as the “enemy” of the Thai nation and the Thai people, causing them to lose their very “Thainess” and credibility.

​P.S. I don’t love Thailand any less than many do. However, for me, I view nationhood differently. The nation’s sovereignty rests with ordinary people who have to suffer and incur unnecessary losses, not just the elite, the military, or those socal media “influencers” who manipulate people for engagement metrics and donations.

​P.S. 2 What’s more important than being Thai or Khmer is being human. Let us reduce our nationalist sentiment and increase our humanity. One proof of this is the fact that some Thais and Cambodians reacted with laughing emoji signs following the news about the loss of life and suffering of Thais or Cambodians due to accidents, flooding, etc.

_______