Shooting the foreign messengers won't kill the news

Reuters recently reported that some foreign journalists were finding it very difficult to get their accreditation. However, it also cited a flat denial from the Foreign Ministry that it was making things difficult. 

So, what’s all this fuss about?

One veteran foreign correspondent working for a well-known European news organisation summed it up by saying that the government wants to ensure that foreign correspondents are not too critical about two issues – the military regime and the monarchy. 

The source, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of negative repercussions, said applicants are asked two questions during their work-permit interview by the Foreign Ministry. The first is on their thoughts about the monarchy and the other is about their views on the coup and the current government. 

These two questions perhaps provide a clue on who is preferred here. 

No matter how diplomatic the applicants try to be with their answers, there is always a “due diligence” conducted by the government to ensure that the answer matches what the applicant has written on these issues in the past. 

Clearly, the government wants foreign journalists who are accommodating to the junta and reverent to the monarchy. 

Two cases in point: 

A European journalist, who had been critical of the coup, eventually got an interview at the Foreign Ministry after she brought the matter of unnecessary delays in her application process to the attention of her embassy. She later said that during the Foreign Ministry interview, she was asked very little about her work experience, and far “too many” questions on her opinions about the coup, the regime and the royal family. 

Another European freelance journalist based in Bangkok, who had previously voiced critical opinions about the regime, said his application process was proving to be “increasingly difficult”.

In fact, the editor of the news organisation to which this freelance journalist contributes was “invited” by the Thai Embassy in his country for a chat. The embassy wanted to learn about the editor’s views on Thailand and also wanted to “share” the official view on Thailand with the editor. 

These are just few of many cases, though one optimistic foreign correspondent has suggested that they be compiled and brought to the attention of the Foreign Ministry at once. 

However, the very concept of “selecting” only friendly foreign correspondents to cover Thailand during such an important transitional period in politics would end up being counter-productive to debate and analysis of what’s happening. 

The powers-that-be should not shoot these foreign messengers simply because they don’t like what’s reported. A mirror, no matter how distorted one may think it is, always opens up the space for diverse reflection and eventually enriches the debate on what’s actually happening. 

Preventing some foreign correspondents from doing their jobs is ironically attracting attention to what’s wrong with Thailand and making it a very bona fide topic.