The glass now seems half-empty in the two English-language newspapers when judging Prayut and his government.
Or do the two papers block and discriminate against supporters of Prayut? Or perhaps the supporters just vanished?
Meanwhile Bangkok has just been named the most-visited city in the world, so tourism is doing well – yet we see little reporting or joy about that. Then came statistics showing the economy is doing well. Not much said about that progress either. One editorial did say a little bit, yes. But it then asked, what about the poor? Hopefully the poor have a long-time advocate in that editor, or was the advocacy merely meant to belittle the progress made? By the way, Prayut did not seize power to fix the economy and so on, but to make a solid foundation for a sustainable democracy which is not open to politicians’ self-enrichment. So despite that, it’s amazing Thailand in general is doing quite well.
Yes, it is very disappointing that too little is being done for the poor, and I hope media will follow up on their plight after the election – especially now they have shown their clear sympathy thoughtfulness for the poor. But why all these concerted media attacks using “dubious” beauty-contest polls showing Prayut's popularity is in decline? And are recent individual cases like the dead military cadet and the proposed coal plant – both distressing and serious in themselves – being hyped up by the media to diminish Prayut? Is it instead possible that the overall picture is not so bad, if we judge by the statistics rather than beauty-contest polls? Or have preparations for the election already started, with the usual demonising, distorting, divisiveness and so on?