Disturbing questions from Rattapoom controversy

Photo: Kanchai Kamnerdploy and Rattapoom Tokongsup

Everyone knows that the iCon scandal is extensive, and there will certainly be more shocks along the way, but what is truly concerning is that it is increasingly hard to tell bad guys from good ones.

Also, the scandal is underlining the fact that public relations is getting more and more intertwined with journalism. The job of boosting or maintaining the image and controlling the damage can be misinterpreted as a necessary journalistic step of presenting “the other side of the coin”.

The Rattapoom controversy shows that the thin line is getting thinner, legally and ethically speaking. Is Rattapoom Tokongsup an innocent PR agent losing his way, or is he something worse?

At a time when pretty and youthful faces with good reputations are being darkly exposed on a daily basis, that is not a jaw-dropping question. But it’s extremely disturbing all the same.

Are people really expected to pay tens of millions of baht to be on a supposedly “tell-all” news programme? Are news hosts willing to accept or expected to accept any sum of money at all to put people with propagating information on air?

If money is a prerequisite in TV media appearance, what about those who can’t afford it? If ratings are what matter most, what about people who can’t act and look extremely boring but whose side of the story can really promote justice? What about people whose troubles cannot boost ratings but mean life and death to them?

Kanchai “Noom” Kamnerdploy is threatening legal action against anyone responsible for an impression that his popular “Hone Krasae” programme which tackles heated news subjects of the hour is a forum that can effectively find fault with or whitewash any individual.

To cut a long story short, Rattapoom was acting as a middleman between Hone Krasae and the iCon Group when the direct and online sale company was having its back against the rope.

Rattapoom allegedly demanded Bt20 million from iCon Group in exchange for a Hone Krasae session that “will have a happy ending”.

The alleged Bt20 million demand, while outrageous, is hardly a blackmail or a threat. It seemed like an obscene request for a go-between fee, which the iCon

Group could always balk at. It’s what public relations people are familiar with, but when journalism is concerned, it’s a no-no.

Kanchai looked very angry on hearing the Bt20 million story. He had to be, because that kind of profits is what differentiates public relations from journalism.

Hone Krasae has been building its reputation as a good journalistic forum, but skyrocketing popularity has brought about not just glory, but also negative rumours. Going down a slippery slope has happened to renowned media institutions or individuals elsewhere, including those in more-advanced countries.

Journalism is probably the most restricted job in the world. If you are a reporter, you can’t drink wine with your sources or play golf with them, or accept their luxurious gifts. If they handsomely reward you for being mentioned in your articles or appearing in your clips or programmes, it only means one thing _ you have done something seriously wrong.

Before he died in 1998, Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot sparked a big ethical controversy by giving an exclusive interview to a western journalist, and there were attempts to monetize that interview. Imagine people hoping to get money from selling Killing Fields stories told by a much-maligned man.

Kanchai has been fighting tooth and nail against the iCon Group, so to be fair to him, his opponents must be hell-bent on discrediting the former actor. It could be a revenge, or it can serve as a big distraction.

Leaked Rattapoom conversation with two women, one of them an iCon boss, did not only damage his reputation, but it also threatened to jeopardise Kanchai’s.

However, the Rattapoom controversy is a big irony in itself, one that could boomerang against the iCon executives if they originated it.

The iCon scandal involves victims allegedly defrauded of their savings, so the suggestion that the company’s executives were willing to pay for a PR air time cannot shine a good light on the firm.

It only underlined the perception that the bosses were ready to buy their way out of trouble whereas those at the bottom of the pyramid did not have such a power to fight for justice.

Yet the biggest iCon lesson for the public is that nobody shall be trusted, and alleged deceit is peeling off one layer after another. In other words, more jaw-dropping surprises can be in store.