Bangkok Media Outlets Issues Apology for Glorifying Past Dictatorship
Thailand’s public broadcaster, Thai PBS, faced significant controversy after publishing an article seemingly praising dictatorial rule and its purported link to economic prosperity. The article, titled “Dictatorship Builds the Nation, People ‘Nostalgia for Strong Leadership-Economic Prosperity’,” prompted swift and widespread criticism, leading to its removal and a public apology from the broadcaster.
Published on February 28th and last updated on March 4th, 2025, the piece juxtaposed images of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, Thailand’s military dictator from 1959 to 1963, and current Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha. This visual comparison, coupled with the article’s title, immediately drew condemnation. Professor Parinya Tewanarumitkul, a prominent law professor at Thammasat University, publicly criticized the article on social media, highlighting its biased perspective and lack of historical context. He argued that it presented a dangerously simplistic view of dictatorship, failing to acknowledge the profound negative consequences of authoritarian rule that continue to impact Thai politics.
Professor Parinya noted several factual inaccuracies and omissions. He pointed out that the economic growth under Field Marshal Sarit’s regime was largely due to significant financial aid from the United States, fueled by Cold War anxieties and a desire to prevent Thailand from falling under communist influence. Moreover, the economic successes of that era were also significantly influenced by the astute leadership of Puey Ungphakorn, then governor of the Bank of Thailand. The article’s omission of these crucial details, Professor Parinya argued, created a misleading picture of Sarit’s rule.
The comparison to General Prayut Chan-o-cha proved particularly contentious. Professor Parinya argued that juxtaposing General Prayut with Field Marshal Sarit implied a similar nation-building narrative, despite the current prime minister’s legacy being marked by political instability and a controversial 2017 constitution designed to resist amendment. He highlighted the irony of the article’s reference to “perfect elections” and a “return to democratic government” following the 2014 coup against Yingluck Shinawatra’s government. He emphasized that the current electoral system and the Election Commission remain problematic, citing General Prayut and Srettha Thavisin’s ascents to the premiership, both facilitated by senators appointed by General Prayut himself.
The public outcry following Professor Parinya’s critique resulted in the swift removal of the article from Thai PBS’s website and social media platforms. The broadcaster issued a statement acknowledging the criticism and apologizing for the article’s “insufficiently comprehensive” presentation. They admitted that the article could be misinterpreted and used as a political tool, contrary to their intentions. Thai PBS pledged a transparent investigation and promised future improvements to their editorial process.
This incident underscores the ongoing challenges faced by Thai PBS. Established in 2008 after several iterations (iTV, TITV, and TV Thai), the broadcaster aims to function as an independent public service broadcaster, similar to the BBC or NHK, free from government influence and commercial pressures. Funded by a 1.5% “sin tax” on alcohol and tobacco, Thai PBS faces unique challenges in navigating its role in the evolving media landscape, balancing its mandate for independent reporting with pressures related to funding and political sensitivities. The controversy highlights the complexities and vulnerabilities inherent in maintaining truly independent public broadcasting in a politically charged environment. The incident serves as a potent reminder of the importance of rigorous fact-checking, balanced reporting, and a commitment to presenting diverse perspectives, especially when dealing with sensitive historical and political issues.
