And it looks like this particular legacy of his first has to be dismantled before any serious political reform can take place.

There is little doubt that the five years under Thaksin were a most pressing time for the Thai media. The tactics employed by the businessman-turned-politician to co-opt and intimidate the media were both ingenious and unprecedented. The state-controlled media outlets probably suffered the most from his high-handed interference. So much so that they found it more convenient to internalise the political demands of the day rather than challenge them and run the risk of a backlash.

It's not that Thaksin was the first political leader to manipulate the media, but he did so with a clear-cut political agenda. Thaksin's political vision allowed no room for a free and critical media, which he considered a threat to his grand political plan. Even parts of the traditionally liberal print media were pressured or "persuaded" to compromise their journalistic principles by diluting their political coverage.

So under Thaksin, self-censorship was the order of the day - especially for the broadcast media, which were much more closely monitored by the powers-that-were. A phone call or two from Government House to a TV newsroom was enough to put the brakes on certain stories. Either for reasons of survival or to curry favour, TV journalists learned how to spin stories to serve politicians' agendas, instead of trying to tell things as they were.

There has been much talk in recent weeks about the need to overhaul the state-owned mass media. The attention seems to be focused on the Mass Communication Organisation of Thailand (MCOT), a listed broadcaster, and the Public Relations Department, the government's propaganda arm. Besides owning the country's two national TV stations, the two agencies also operate dozens of radio stations nationwide.

MCOT, however, has been making more headlines because of what is understood to be attempts by members of its new board to improve on the programming of Channel 9, the flagship of the state enterprise. While MCOT has yet to decide on a new president to succeed Mingkwan Sangsuwan, its new board does offer some hope that the broadcaster will be in the hands of a more qualified leadership than before. The task before them is definitely daunting and strong political will is needed to affect changes at the state enterprise known for power plays and competing interests.

Unfortunately the debate about changes at Channel 9 so far seems to centre on programming changes rather than issues of more substance. Some board members are giving the impression that the only facelift that the state enterprise might need is a change in the programming of Channel 9. Some existing prime-time programmes have reportedly been targeted already to make way for new programmes classified as being "more educational and socially beneficial".

But it would be a mistake to believe that by simply getting rid of some old programmes and introducing some new ones, Channel 9 will emerge a broadcaster with the public interest at heart and become free from political interference overnight. What MCOT truly needs is a structural change that will ensure that it makes serving the public interest, and not taking political orders, a priority.

A big challenge is how to change the mindset of the executives and employees, especially those in the newsrooms at both Channel 9 and MCOT's radio network. Political pressure was able to bend editorial policy at Channel 9 and MCOT's radio outlets because nobody felt the need to stand up to it. Once the president, the top boss at the state enterprise, gave in to political demands - which was the case more often than not - total compliance on the part of the news staff was automatic.

MCOT's employees cannot be faulted for their political subservience. In the first place, they have never been made to feel that they have a say in defending the organisation. The management never found it necessary to solicit their ideas or views when changing or introducing new programmes.

MCOT certainly needs a new leadership capable of charting a new course in which employees will have a role in defining its direction. Those in the newsroom in particular need to be encouraged to be more independent editorially. To be able to do that, the new board of directors and MCOT's new president must help them devise defence mechanisms so that they can carry out their journalistic duty without fear of political retribution.

All this requires a complete paradigm shift in the thinking of the new management team. Of course, a commitment to public-mindedness is also necessary as it will certainly run into strong opposition from various interest groups - or even from the powers-that-be.

While reform of the broadcast media is nowhere in sight, MCOT's management and employees need to work together to start a tradition of independence that can more or less shield them from future political interference. Who knows when the likes of Thaksin will be back at the helm of the country?

Thepchai Yong