Given the tumultuous developments over the past seven years, including the aftermath of the coup on September 19 of last year, Thai journalists have displayed a paucity of media ethics that has never before been seen. They have failed to practice what they preach. Conflicts of interest and hypocrisy have been rampant, while the messengers have become king-makers at one end and cheap-shot surrogates at the other. It is imperative to take a closer look at the Thai media to see what has become of them now. A snapshot of the Thai media's 150-history would remind us all that the benchmark for media professionalism was set a long time ago when a free media environment did not exist and financial rewards were unheard of.

During the reign of Rama V (1868-1910), a young Thai journalist named Thien Wannapho (1842-1915), popularly known as Thienwan, wrote numerous articles that challenged the highest wielders of power in all aspects without fear or favour. He repeatedly called for the abolition of slavery, ending all forms of gambling, establishing a parliamentary democracy, as well as fighting against corruption and injustice in all forms. When he wrote a petition to King Chulalongkorn on behalf of a Thai citizen he was accused of lese majeste and defamation against Cabinet members. As a result, he was caned 50 times before being made to face a 17-year jail term at the age of 40. During the first two years of his imprisonment, he was tortured inhumanely with wooden bars around his neck, hands, and feet day and night. His body was crippled but not his spirit. No newspaper would publish his articles for fear of prosecution, however he would give his writings to those who dared to publish them at their own peril, mostly in the form of funeral memorial books or free booklets.

Thienwan was well known for his straight talk. He wrote in clear and crisp Thai prose without any pretension. His criticisms aimed at the top echelon were acerbic, and so were his writings lashing out at ordinary folk. No one, it seems, escaped his well thought out commentaries. As strange as it might seem, what he wrote over 100 years ago is still appropriate for the current situation in Thailand and the leaders and people who are caught up in it.

The versatile journalist, who taught himself law and philosophy, was not kind to his fellow citizens, whom he called "foolish common folk". He said they were without any intellect or knowledge but loved gambling, which had no usefulness to their country or religion. He often ridiculed top bureaucrats, known as senabodi, who frequently violated laws and regulations to serve their own vested interests.

Later on, in the manner of Thienwan, Kularb Saipradit, a remarkable writer and journalist, made his name with commentaries and fiction from 1938 to 1960 against dictatorship. After World War II, Thailand was part of the free world and anti-communist sentiment was at its peak. His writings were viewed with much contempt and every word and phrase was scrutinised. It is not wrong to say that Kularb's writings had the qualities of those by Gabriel Garcia Marquez or Mario Vargas Llosa; they were able to wield great social and political influence. In 1953, he was jailed for years after crossing the government of Field Marshal Plaek Pibulsonggram by criticising his governance and leadership gaffes. While Kularb was on a visit to Beijing in 1958, Thailand's worst dictator, Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, staged a coup and took power from Plaek. Kularb then went into exile in China, where he stayed until his death in 1974.

As a journalist, Kularb wrote often for Prachachart Daily, which he used to reiterate the importance of the role of the press. "The country's comprehensive advancement is the compass for the press, who must stand on the side of democracy," he wrote. He founded the Association of Thai Reporters in 1939, which later merged with the Thai Journalists Association in 2000. Other journalistic heavyweights who fought hard for democracy against dictators and who never took press freedoms for granted included Malai Chupinit, Sarit Charoenrat, Chavieng Savetathat, Choti Praphan and Issara Amantakul.

Fast forward to the 1990s, and a time when the Thai media were considered society's watchdogs. They were united with like-minded editors and staff reporters who shared the same worldview. However, the Asian economic crisis of 1997 had one unforeseen disastrous consequence - it quickly destroyed the ability of the Thai press to operate independently. Concerned with economic survival, certain press establishments decided to forego principles and professional standards in exchange for economic incentives and other favours. Growing financial pressure facing managerial and editorial staff further polarised the Thai media. During the economic slump, it was a zero-sum game for every media outlet.

When Thaksin Shinawatra was elected premier in 2001, the Thai media quickly morphed into lapdogs. Thaksin exploited this window of opportunity to the hilt, pitting one media establishment against another. News management and spin became commonplace. He credited himself with stimulating domestic consumption, which in turn increased media revenue. With new money comes new editorial policy. Straight talking became harder to come by. During Thaksin's second term, unusual political circumstances played an important part in extracting the best and worst features of media professionalism. Thai journalists were up in arms against Thaksin's strongman approach and plans to usurp various media establishment via the use of proxies and rich friends. He wanted the media to become part of the nation-building process. After all, he asked in early 2005, "who elects journalists?". Along the way, a few media outlets and their editors balked and began harrowing the government like wolves going after prey.

Media restrictions and the lack of freedom under Thaksin were an aberration. Since the coup, a better atmosphere towards freedom of expression has prevailed. Print media outlets continue to operate freely, while electronic and new media have faced some hiccups. Generally speaking though, while the interim government has been friendly to the media and showed a high level of tolerance for critical views, their representatives who deal with them are a bunch of clowns. There have been more media fiascos in the past six months than during any period in modern Thai history.

It's a strange but true fact that, as with the economic crisis of a decade ago, political fluidity and unpredictability has resulted in media outlets and their leading personalities showing their true colours. It has become customary for them to hedge against the future and take whatever they can now. No one remembers the spirit of their colleagues of the past.

Kavi Chongkittavorn