Hate speech an 'obstacle to democracy'

Political hate speech is prevalent in all types of Thai media and while there’s no consensus on exactly what constitutes hate speech, there are no clear measures to tackle the issue either, researchers said. 

Hate speech is particularly noticeable on partisan satellite TV and community radios, a study conducted by Chulalongkorn University’s Media Policy Studies Centre discovered.

“If they don’t play it hard, they won’t have [loyal] listeners and hence no ads,” researcher Chanansara Oranop na Ayutthaya said. “However, though hate speech provides instant gratification and attracts lots of fans, it is not conducive to democracy.” 

Chanansara, who presented the findings at Bangkok’s Montien Hotel yesterday, cited several examples including a photograph circulated by ASTV satellite TV showing Sondhi Limthongkul, co-leader of the People’s Alliance for Democracy, holding a can of insecticide that is apparently aimed at the opposition Democrat Party, often compared to a cockroach. 

Similarly, the anti-government partisan media has decided to put the red shirts in the “brainwashed masses” slot, Chanansara said, adding that those perceived to be against the monarchy are usually advised to leave the Kingdom.

Hate speech can be divided into three categories: stereotyping others in a degrading fashion; dehumanising the other party; and inciting violence. She said hate speech in the third category should be regulated through law, the National Broadcasting and Telecommunication Commission (NBTC) and media self-censorship. However, she said, the biggest problem is that nearly all community television and radio stations were not members of any professional media association. 

Somchai Suwanban, managing director of Thai PBS and a commentator on the study, said partisan TV stations would not exist in a truly democratic country because its one-sided stance would not meet the standards set by the media code of conduct. 

However, Ubonrat Siriyuwasak, a former lecturer of communication arts at Chulalongkorn University, warned that the temptation to censor the media might eventually lead to widespread control and a repressed society. 

As for print media, researchers found that of the six publications studied, content of the now-defunct Voice of Taksin magazine contained the highest level of hate speech at 42.1 per cent, followed by ASTV Manager Daily at 28.5 per cent, lead researcher Pichitra Tsukamoto said. 

Thepchai Yong, the group editor-in-chief of Nation Multimedia Group, who was present to comment on print media, said there was a need for people who can help cut down on hate speech. 

Chaiwat Satha-anand, professor of Political Science at Thammasat University and a leading expert on peace studies, said that though hate speech and hate crimes were linked, this link was quite difficult to identify. Hate speech might trigger events that may turn into hate crimes, but nobody can predict what will become the last straw. 

“Hate speech is a litmus test for the marketplace of ideas,” Chaiwat said, adding that free speech also required limits. “I will not tolerate child pornography or [calls for] cannibalism, but I cannot say what [the limits] should be.”

In relation to hate speech on online media, Chulalongkorn University’s Pirongrong Ramasoota said posts related to the lese majeste law and the monarchy could not be publicly examined and analysed due to legal constraints. 

“Many things cannot be clarified or discussed. Even if we notice it, we cannot convey it publicly,” Pirongrong, an assistant professor of Communication Arts, said.

As for hate speech related to ethnicity, Pichitra said issues of crime and illegal gambling complicated hate speech against Myanmar migrant workers in Samut Sakhon province. “The very issue of ethnicity is sensitive,” she said.