Sirikanya Warns of Repeating History with World Cup Broadcasting Rights Purchase; Government Shouldn't Expect Just Popularity Points
A Pheu Thai deputy warns that a 1.3 billion baht cabinet plan to buy World Cup broadcasting rights risks repeating past funding mistakes, with unclear sources and potential harm to vulnerable groups' media access programs.
On May 12, 2025, Sirikanya Tansukul, a list MP and deputy leader of the Pheu Thai Party, discussed the cabinet's approval of 1.3 billion baht for the NBTC to purchase World Cup broadcasting rights. She noted that the cabinet resolution remains unclear about who will actually purchase the rights and who will pay for them, raising concerns that history may repeat itself. Four years ago, funding came from multiple sources including approximately half from the Public Broadcasting, Television, and Telecommunications Development Fund (BTPC) and the Thai Sports Authority (SAT) sports fund, with private sector participation.
Sirikanya pointed out two previous issues with this approach. First, the BTPC fund was not designed for this type of use; its purpose is to serve vulnerable groups like low-income individuals and persons with disabilities by providing media access. Second, regarding the sports development fund, using it to purchase broadcasting rights rather than develop domestic sports raises questions about priorities.
She expressed concern that without clarity on funding sources and without private sector commitment, the government may resort to the same subsidy model. Sirikanya also noted a different context this time: the NBTC's Must Have regulations no longer require free World Cup broadcasts since it was removed from the mandatory list, and previous private sector involvement has proven problematic—as seen in the dispute between True and the NBTC over Must Carry rules, where viewers couldn't access broadcasts on all platforms.
Sirikanya argued that if the government hastily guarantees free viewing, it weakens negotiating power with international rights holders and private bidders, who may then demand state subsidies. She emphasized that while funds from these sources have specific purposes and shouldn't be diverted for short-term economic solutions, they should instead be returned to the treasury if not used as intended.
