The 21st century may have arrived elsewhere around the world, but here in Thailand we remain locked in the Cold War. Tensions along the border with Burma have found their latest expression in a tit-for-tat, pseudo-history lesson spat in our two media.
The Thai army adopted a radio offensive when Defence Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh gave his blessing to the mobilisation of almost all 130 army- owned radio stations in broadcasting items critical of the Rangoon government. This was in response to a series of articles insulting the Thai monarchy that appeared in the Rangoon junta mouthpiece the New Light of Myanmar.
The newspaper articles by Ma Tin Win, probably now the best known Burmese among Thais, might have reflected a personal view but they also, no doubt, were the position of the ruling State Peace and Development Council, which routinely uses the media to further its political aims.
Burmese reporters working for state-owned radio, television, newspapers and magazines are well aware of what they can write and what they must avoid. Stories about the rising cost of staple goods and inflation, for example, are areas which are off-limits.
Two years ago, one Burmese journalist recalled, the censors barred reports of floods that had killed many people after a crack appeared in a dam in the country's central region. ``Myanmar [Burmese] journalists are yet to be allowed to report on official corruption and other forms of malpractice by government personnel, and negative social and economical events and trends in Myanmar,'' he said.
Lieutenant-General Khin Nyunt, SPDC first secretary and the intelligence chief, reflected Burmese government thinking on the role of the media when he cautioned journalists two years ago to avoid reports that might cause damage to the country and its people.
Few Burmese nationals believe or even pay much attention to the state- controlled media, including the New Light of Myanmar, which is said to print 25,000 copies daily. ``The English version of the New Light of Myanmar does not enjoy a very good reputation due to the mundane news presentation and lack of information to readers,'' the same Burmese reporter said.
Sunait Chutintaranond, a leading Thai historian on Burma at Chulalongkorn University, supported this assessment. He said most Burmese people ignored the newspaper, which is widely seen as a vehicle for the junta to attack Nobel peace laureate and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
It is perhaps ironic that the Thai army is resorting to the old tactics of assault by airwaves at a time when young Burmese journalists are trying to move on. These younger journalists are striving for more freedom and room for expression, while the Thai army just shows that it is little better than the Rangoon junta by trading insults.
The propaganda war no doubt reminds many Thais of a time some decades ago when Thailand was bordered by communist states. The governments of the day and the army, which occasionally were practically indistinguishable, aired anti-communist messages on TV and radio to viewers and listeners at home and in neighbouring Cambodia and Laos.The army initiative is the latest concern for the Thai media. Only six months into the year, the situation already is as serious as last year, which the Thai Journalists' Association labelled the ``Year of Media Interference''.
The investigation of media figures thought to be critical of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his cabinet by the Anti-Money Laundering Organisation rocked an industry which had believed such dark goings-on were well behind us. Fortunately, the Administrative Court ruled on June 24 that the Amlo order for 17 financial institutions to look into transactions of the media representatives was illegal.``The Amlo investigation was the best example of how far a government can go to harm the media,'' said Ubonrat Siriyuvasak, a media observer at Chulalongkorn University.Listeners must also now be well acquainted with the prime minister and his Saturday morning radio show which sets out to market his policies and counter any criticism.
The recent World Cup football finals produced new heights in toadying when commentators thanked the minister attached to the Prime Minister's Office along with the sponsors for bringing viewers the football matches live without any advertising interruption.
The army's anti-Burma campaign emphasises the media's usefulness as tools of state agencies. It provides them with bargaining power, Ms Ubonrat said.Thailand has 525 radio stations, 147 run by the Public Relations Department and 62 by the Mass Communication Organisation. And there is the huge number belonging to the armed forces.
This stranglehold over ownership of the media and the many uses they are put to by state agencies underlines the difficulty of freeing up the media. The constitution calls for radio and television operations to become national assets, with the National Broadcasting Committee serving as an independent agency to distribute frequencies.But the media are a problem in themselves. Some provincial reporters abuse their position for personal wealth and influence. The Thai Journalists' Association, which represents most reporters, ``must be decisive and serious'' about curbing this problem, Ms Ubonrat said.
The media spat between Thailand and Burma shows up other weaknesses in our media. They need to do their homework to better understand the complexity of Thai-Burmese relations. The historical differences and convergences need to be understood.
``The Thai press comes up blank when it comes to specific issues such as history,'' Mr Sunait said. ``Of course, it can rely on the help of academics, but it needs a body of knowledge to keep pace with what is happening in the world.''
Critics say the media have overplayed the conflict with Burma. ``Some media have covered this event as if Thailand and Burma were at war,'' Mr Sunait said. ``Will the media take responsibility for the consequences of their coverage?''