Media reform is sweet. But media responsibility is sweet, too. Calls for the need to reform the mass media are growing, from journalists and activists who see freedom of expression and a free press in danger.

It is not unusual nowadays to see editors split their time between the office and the courts. They have to direct their papers and also fight charges filed by the government or by caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra himself through his legal representatives. In fact, the press have more cases to fight with this government than any other in recent history.

Appearing before court is, in fact, one of several problems facing the media, print media in particular, today. Others include harassment and the use of the mass media under state control to serve its purpose.

The events eventually led to a gathering of reporters, from seniors to juniors, vowing to fight threats with backing from other organisations in and outside the country. "We believe that a threat to the media is a threat to the people," said the Southeast Asian Press Alliance, a network of the press in the region. That reflected a common concern for the problems the Thai press were encountering, even now. There is no better example of the use of government-controlled media than the recently ended weekly radio talk featuring Mr Thaksin. Until August 19, every Saturday he sat in front of the microphone if he was in the country, or made a long-distance call if he was overseas, giving his message directly to the people through a live national broadcast. He believes that by doing so, people will have accurate information right from his own mouth, instead of reading and listening to news from some media he considers contaminated with lies and bias. Other government-controlled media also have the same purpose. They craft information to promote the government and intentionally limit reports on other groups opposed to the administration.

That could be why the rural folk - who largely rely on information fed by the state media, having little access to the internet and other sources - wonder what has gone so wrong with Mr Thaksin that people in Bangkok and other urban areas are crying foul? How can a government leader who allocates money to the rural poor to improve their livelihood be hammered with criticism about irregularities and conflicts of interest?

That is why all supporters of mass media reform want to see an end to political interference in all media, no matter who controls them. They want freedom of the press to be better guaranteed. A free press will give people accurate information and have reporters fulfil their duty of checking the performance of the government and politicians.

Still, demand for reform alone is not enough. The press needs self-improvement, too. Newspaper readers and TV viewers might call into question the maturity and social responsibility of the media after seeing inappropriate crime scenes on television and the almost obscene pictures in the papers - the most recent reminder being the picture of girls in a toilet taken by a hidden camera on Aug 23. Editors might argue that such pictures boost ratings and sell papers. But many viewers do not buy that excuse. What is shown by the press can influence people directly or indirectly. Scenes of violence on TV can stir more violence in society. Near-obscene pictures can encourage more sex-related incidents. And those trying to tighten their grip on the media will tell the public: Look, the press have so much freedom that they are abusing it!

It all depends on reporters, editors and all bodies governing the mass media to push for better responsibility towards society. Reform and improvement must go together. That would be the sweetest of all.

This is cache, read story here