The World On arirang

On July 10, the dramatic rescue of a boy's soccer team who were stranded in a cave in Thailand also cast a spotlight on the Thai government's information control throughout the operation. Throughout the 18 days that it took to rescue all the children, the Thai government refused to disclose their identities and kept the progress of rescue efforts tightly under wraps. This was conducted with the aim of respecting the privacy of the childrens' families, as well as preventing the press coverage of the incident from hindering the rescue operation. However, some critics have pointed out that the Thai government may have infringed on the public's right to know, given the nature of the story which topped headlines across the world. In light of these restrictions, some Thai media outlets resorted to illegal means to cover the incident, such as flying in drones and tapping into policy frequencies to monitor the rescue operation. The cave rescue in Thailand has triggered debate over the public's right to know, as well as the role and responsibility of the press. So what exactly constitutes the public's right to know, and what should take precedence when it infringes upon an individual's right to privacy? How far should we go to disclose the private lives of public figures, and do the means justify the end when legal boundaries must to crossed to serve the greater good? In this week's edition of "Foreign Correspondents", we sit down with our panel of journalists to discuss all of these questions in more detail.

Panelists
Jason Strother, Journalist / Public Radio International
Frank Smith, Correspondent / Press TV
Mikihiko Ueno, Journalist / Tokyo Shimbun