Saturday, November 17, 2007

Bangkok Post: Does Matichon Writer Nongnuch Singhadecha Live On Another Planet?

War of words


Bangkok Post

A Matichon editorial says People Power Party leader Samak Sundaravej doesn't understand the print media - and that he will never be able to beat it

From the mouth of Nongnuch:

If Samak had known how the reporters did their jobs, Samak may not have resorted to the outburst with such an infamous sentence. The problem is that Samak has never been a reporter, Nongnuch contends. It's true that Samak used to own a newspaper and that he had written personal opinions. He also used to be a TV anchorman, but he has never gone out to gather news in the field, and had to distinguish what was news from opinion.

Does this make sense? Samak's lame outburst has nothing to do with the profession of journalism.

Samak's outburst was a diversionary tactic because he hoped reporters would passively report what he wanted to say to the media, without probing too deeply into the PPP's internal affairs.

What probing? What has she uncovered? She has proved nothing other than that Samak made a dumb remark,

Unfortunately for him, though, the print media is not owned by Samak or the PPP. They are not prostitute MPs who raise hands for any party in return for remuneration.

There are no bigger prostitutes in Thai society than those in the press. The Thai media gives hookers a bad name.

A reporter worth his salt would not easily believe a story he was told by just one side. He would not just sit tight and report exact words uttered by politicians. He would probe and investigate all relevant information before writing a report.

I almost threw up when I read this. She lives in her own little la la land.

Samak declared that he would continue his battle against the print media if they dared to pose any additional embarrassing questions. Nongnuch asserts this is fine, reasoning that the print media has been fighting politicians' threats in all forms for so long that they were not easily intimidated. Much of the print media has existed for decades, at least for 30 or 40 years and for much longer than the Thai Rak Thai party. The print media has seen the rise and fall of political parties and politicians; it's seen some politicians jailed for corruption, some commit suicide, and others flee abroad.

Yeah, right, the Thai media's courage in this matter was to run to the EC to get Samak silenced.

So if an old politician like Samak wants to declare war on the print media, it will not be afraid because it has already seen it all, and yet still survives as a fourth estate institution, concluded Nongnuch.

Well, at least we know that self-delusion exists in places other than at The Nation.

Nongnuch will definitely be nominated at the end of the year for the Sopon Prize for most idiocy spouted by a Thai journalist.


Thai Observer said...

Fonzi: A personal opinion; try not to get so bent out of shape about the Thai press. Most if what they say is prompted by the self-image that Thais have and not the facts. Remember that their self-image is built up from childhood, listening to the propaganda from others, and then their own propaganda. Reality has nothing to do with anything in Thailand, all that matters is their self-image (and their 'face' is destroyed when they have to confront the fact that their perception of self is a confection and has no substance - then they lose it altogether). T

There is so much else to mock, all you have to do is trawl the newspapers for the stuff of stand-up comics blurted out as real-life wisdom. In Thailand anyone with more than 2 brain cells can rise to the top. The likes of you, me and others can have such fun just mocking and scorning them.


(c) 2016 Written by Andrew Batt said...

Fonzi - After your post on my site I've come to yours. I see you and I share some of the same opinions about the Thai media. Personally I'm trying to do something about it. Our new magazine has a Code of Standards and Ethics that is literally world-class. All our journalists must adhere to it, and if they don't they will not be with us for very long. It's a start but there is a long way to go.

sooksiam said...

“Can we have a little less of your anti-Thaksin, every thing is crap about Thailand writing?” That was what you said in Khun Andrew’s blog. The comment blatantly depicted how much you are still in love with your beloved square-faced thrown out PM.
Whether Samak, aka the Schmuck, understands the media or not he has already become their number one enemy. Samak’s lame outburst might have nothing to do with the profession of journalism, but as a person who is competing for the coveted job in Thailand, he should, at least, be more tactful before releasing such diarrhoea from his mouth. If you remember the recent incident, this oversized hooter, who might become the next PM, God help us, just rudely barked at one journalist. I guess you, Fonzi the manatee, prefer this sort of behaviour since you surreptitiously champion the PPP. Come to think of it, his loud mouth is not dissimilar to his Manchester city FC owner friend. The difference is that he has not yet uttered the “UN is not my father” phrase.
There are no bigger prostitutes in Thai blogosphere than “Thailand Jumped the Shark” who frequently attacks anybody who criticises Thaksin and his friends. Despite claiming to be neutral, the Shark, has so far failed to demonstrate the courage to dissect any of Thaksin’s policies. I bet you must be really highly paid to compose your nonsensically fearless deconstruction here, Fonzi.
My love, why do you have a problem with a reporter who dares to ask this hooter a question? I thought you wanted Thai journalists to get the facts straight. If they do not fire him a direct and embarrassing question, how on earth are these people going to attain their informative and trustworthy objectives. If the man cannot face a grilling, he should not bid for the top job.
I am not entirely sure if Nongnuch is one of those self-deluded people, though one thing I am so convinced about is that the Shark is definitely one of them. Fonzi, I guarantee that, without a doubt, you will also be nominated for the most Thaksin-loyal award. You could easily win it.

Fonzi said...


I'm sorry. I don't know you or you blog.

I have an impostor running around pretending to me, so I don't know who made the comments on your blog under my name.

Regardless, I do support your effort in raising journalism standards in Thailand.

Good luck.

Fonzi said...


You must live on Nongnuch's planet, because I have never defended Samak or Thaksin.

Before making baseless accusations like a Nation journalist, at least have the decency to show text of mine that proves your point.

sooksiam said...

Sweetheart, if you do not defend your beloved square-faced retro-PM, you must know that as a genuinely neutral blogger, who champions fairness and balance, how come you shamelessly fail to deconstruct Thaksin's remark. Here is the example:

Your failure to dissect this article demonstrates the fact that you must furtively adore him.

Anonymous said...

Fonzi it is easy to remove all doubts that you are NOT Thaksin's puppy.

All you have to say is that Thaksin Shinawatra lost his legitimacy to rule by virtue of that mother of all conflict of interest WinMark-AmpleRich-Temasek-Shin $1.8 billion share deal that Thaksin cooked up while thai PM, plus, Thaksin Shinawatra violated Thailand's constitutional rule of law with his extrajudicial police death squads megalomaniacal bloody madness during the 2002-05 anti-drugs. There are more of course (election fraud, land scandal, tax cheating, etc.), the two above are the more serious Thaksin abuses.

Fonzi said...

Corporal and Sookie-

I have been on the record many times about Thaksin:

1. Didn't think the CC should have let him in 2001 with the assets concealment case.

2. Never supported him, never voted for him, don't even know anybody who voted for him or supported him in my personal life. So when you say, Thaksin bought me off, I laugh, because I don't even know anybody affiliated with Thaksin. No Thaksin supporter has ever contacted me privately concerning this blog to share comments or offer gratitude or offer money.

3. I have said Thaksin should have resigned last year. Actually, I thought he did resign, but he made a come back after the king's celebrations.

4. I think he should have paid taxes on the Shin sale and thought he was wrong to do his dodgy deal in the Cayman Islands.

5. His wife shouldn't have been buying land while he was PM. His lawyer shouldn't have been buying hospitals for him while he was PM.
Is that a coupable offense? No.

6. The thought of the dynamic duo of Samak and Chalerm coming into power makes me want to throw up.

I have said this already. And I am saying it again. But if you choose not to believe me, there really is nothing much I can do about it.

(c) 2016 Written by Andrew Batt said...

Fonzi - Thanks for the clarification about my posting on my blog. I must admit it didn't seem to make sense but I have never and will never censor anyone's comments on my blog - good or bad. I will post a clarification, and thanks for your kind words about what I am trying to do. I'll be posting an exact copy of the Code on my blog in the next few days so feel free to comment.
Take care ...

hobby said...

For future reference:

Fonzi on Thaksin & Samak