This elephant in the newsroom

The case of popular news talk show host Sorayuth Suthassanachinda and the embezzlement accusation against him looks to be a very big elephant in the newsroom.

A former reporter, Sorayuth has mastered the "new media" art of retelling news from different sources to television audiences so well that he is reportedly making 1 million baht a day from his news programmes on Channel 3.

According to Isra News Centre, his two companies, which he established with a registered capital of 1 million baht each, have turned over a profit of more than 1 billion baht over the eight years since their establishment.

Was Sorayuth being accused of embezzlement an inevitable story? I believe it was. The talk show host is so popular _ and was especially so during last year's Bangkok floods when he was seen to be out and about giving help to the public _ that he is sometimes dubbed "Thailand's TV Premier".

His influence over the general public is immense. What he chooses to talk about in his morning news programmes usually end up being the talk of the town. It would be no exaggeration that for certain groups of Thai people, the trust they have for "Hia Sor", as he is affectionately known, is more than what they can spare for their ministers.

While Sorayuth being accused by the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) of embezzling money from state-owned Mcot Plc while he was hired to produce news programmes there, caused quite a stir among media professionals, critical news stories about the case have been sparse in the mainstream media.

Reactions from the two main industry groups are also interesting stories in themselves.

Both the Thai Journalists Association (TJA) and the Press Council stopped short of calling for Sorayuth to resign. In their statements, issued about two weeks after the NACC's indictment, they only called for the news anchor to "consider himself".

Sorayuth's response _ a resignation with immediate effect from the TJA, where he has held membership for more than 10 years _ was a throw-back for the groups to "consider themselves".

Another organisation to have joined the fray was the Anti-Corruption Network, comprising more than 40 companies which profess to adhere to "good governance".

The network called on its members to strike where it hurts most, by cutting their advertising spending on Sorayuth's programme and Channel 3.

The result? The silence from most major companies and conglomerates that belong to the Anti-Corruption Network has been deafening. Of the few that were reported to have shown interest, none have committed to the boycott strategy.

Meanwhile, Sorayuth's news programme remains on air and is seemingly as popular as ever, unaffected financially or ratings-wise by questions about the news anchor's ethics.

The latest move is by the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission, whose members said the agency would not weigh in on the issue as it is an ethical "grey" area.

At this point, it seems the issue has reached a standstill, where everyone is eyeing each other and wondering: Who will dare cast the first stone?

I believe, however, that there are other, broader questions this case has raised that are far more important than the fate of Sorayuth or what will happen to his trend-setting news programmes. Chief among them is whether the press can "self-regulate" or not in this age of "the daily me" and "broadcast yourself", when everyone can act like a reporter and when ethics seem far less crucial to the media's survival than popularity with "the masses".

Also, while Sorayuth may be a high-profile figure whose behaviour and ethical standards will naturally be subject to more scrutiny than others, it would be unfair for the graft-busters to single him out and ignore the possibility that the embezzlement he is accused of does not occur anywhere in the mass media.

It's true the case of Sorayuth is a major controversy, one that will no doubt test the ability of the press to control themselves and the public's tolerance of corruption. But it shouldn't be used to mask the biggest elephant that has occupied many newsrooms, without anyone wanting to point it out.

Atiya Achakulwisut is Deputy Editor, Bangkok Post

Share your thoughts

Discussion 1 : 16/10/2012 at 07:31 PM
Sorayuth’s open secret is bad news for those who “occupied many newsrooms”; unless they are embedded with some powerful talisman, they too will come until “strict scrutiny” and lose millions of baht in “extra seconds”. The tamed “reactions from the two main industry groups” and the muted response by Anti-Corruption Network’s boycott suggests a deeper and wide spread practice within this “regurgitated news industry”. When one is living in a glass house “Who will dare cast the first stone?”.
Discussion 2 : 16/10/2012 at 06:01 PM
You say the accusation is like an elephant in the news room, but you don't say why. You just say he makes a profit. You say you believe the story was inevitable, but you don't say why. You just say he is popular. You say there are broader questions "'more important" that the Sorayuth case. I am not interested in the broader questions. I am interested in the details of the allegation. Did he take funds that belonged to MCOT? Is there some vague language in his contract about who gets the funds? Did he just walk into MCOT's cash room and pick up the money? "Self-regulate" and embezzlement are two different things. There is not enough info in the press to have any idea what is going on. What is the accusation? What are the facts?
Discussion 3 : 16/10/2012 at 08:54 AM
Like Thaksin, he is just a good business man who strike lucky. Why, you jealous?
Discussion 4 : 16/10/2012 at 07:39 AM
He surely has enough money, influential friends and dirt on those who aren't friends to ensure he won't be prosecuted. He'll be one of the untouchables (turning the meaning of Elliot Ness's "Untouchables" on it's head).
Discussion 5 : 16/10/2012 at 07:30 AM
Corruption is corruption no matter where it is found. I wish Thailand had the courage to eradicate corruption once and for all. One only has to look to Singapore to how this is done. Come on Thailand, wake up.
Discussion 6 : 16/10/2012 at 07:05 AM
Drag him through court to prove he is guilty, then name and shame those companies and organisations that stood by him. Don't count on the public to do it, 65% of them approve of this sort of behaviour. As the old saying goes 'money talks and the rest walks'.
Discussion 7 : 16/10/2012 at 05:52 AM
The guys an out and out crook and is in the best country to prosper from his illegal activities.
Discussion 8 : 16/10/2012 at 04:29 AM
It was unethical for Mr. Sor to use TV3'S time to defend himself for several mins., its shown that he got a big muscle.
Discussion 9 : 16/10/2012 at 04:08 AM
This story just shows you how corruption is acceptable in Thailand and will be for many years to come.
Discussion 10 : 16/10/2012 at 04:06 AM
The cult of personality needs a rethink in Thailand. Just because someone has popularity doesn't give them licence to act with impunity. Again why are the Thai people apathetic to illegal and unethical behavior by influential people. Don't they see it degrades the country's image as a kind and caring people.

Back to top

More From Bangkokpost.com