What lines can and cannot be crossed in the name of news?

Newspapers published the news and subsequent analyses, while many TV shows invited relevant parties, including social-media influencers, to share their thoughts. 

Academic Warat Karuchit wrote on Tuesday: “Any journalist that crosses the barricades inside [the body removal procession], please realise that in the name of news you have crossed the line, both in terms of media ethics and compassion. That you’re doing it at your editor’s orders or because the competition is fierce is not an excuse. You should know whether you crossed the line – whether you did it on purpose or were just going with the flow, you crossed the line.” 

On Twitter, @youdunnowho wrote: “Journalists, you use Twitter, other people also have cameras. Those who misbehaved while taking photographs, and can be seen in photos and video clips, should beware of being lynched.” 

@Woody754 wrote: “The media should be trained to be eagles, not vultures.” 

On Facebook, One Million Names against Whitewashing page wrote: "Netizens please invite the media to cover the news [in the cremation stove] so they get close-up pictures.”

Tossaporn Wongwaikolayoot wrote: “It won’t be a surprise if the government decides one day to pass media-control law and nobody opposes it.” 

Journalist Lukesua Chai Number Nine wrote: “The media reflects the people. Like in ‘Spotlight’ [the film], unless people speak up, the media would not have been able to cover and present stories about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. This vicious cycle would have remained. In Thai society, people like to consume stories like this so the media covers stories like this.” 

Tanatpong Kongsai wrote: “Believe me, most journalists disagree with ‘the bad ones’.”

Wannasiri Sirivarna wrote: “Mainly it should be the responsibility of media companies for as long as journalists are paid by them. If they get just basic pictures, with no drama, then editors complain: ‘Why did that channel get the exclusive interview? Why did our competitor get the picture of the kid crying?’ … Media companies should have clear policies on news coverage. Professional organisations should also educate entertainment media and make an agreement with the companies. Right now it’s like the good ones are the black sheep.” 

Sumeth Somkanae, chief of the National Union of Journalists, Thailand, launched a Facebook campaign called “Freedom with Responsibility” and won support from many journalists. He wrote: “Please don’t watch, like or share reports from bad or unethical media. Save your time to support responsible media who lack the views [rating]. Will that be better?” 

Anothai Sakulthong wrote: “There are a lot of good media. Please don’t over-generalise. Some people comment because they want to be media themselves. Some media want only likes and shares. It’s difficult to control. So please support ethical media.” 

Academic Sakulsri Srisaracam wrote: “Checking out people’s sentiments on the hashtag #RIPPortid and on Facebook timelines, so many people have been criticising the media instead of mourning for Por. They have instead been mourning for media that have done badly. So bad media should listen. Meanwhile, some media did do a good job when reporting. The mood of people online proves that they do not want content that is in bad taste.” She also shared pictures from NationPhoto, saying: “Good examples are available. They are reporting and using photos in a way that respects the people involved.” 

Prakaidao Baengsunita wrote: “Good photographers don’t have to be closest to the object, their pictures should be able to speak.” 

Veteran TV journalist Pipope Panitchpakdi wrote: “If I owned a news agency, I would have interviewed all photographers and cameramen who were up close and those who chose to shoot without violating the victim’s family. That is more interesting than listening to academics criticising the media, which will only polarise the two further.”