Statement issued on Time magazine's reporting, condemning violation of media ethics

The Press Council issued a statement on the night of September 23, strongly condemning the reporting by Time magazine as a violation of media ethics, stating that it did not reflect the content of the original interview comprehensively and accurately, but instead added other content and analyses. Time magazine had requested an interview through the Myanmar Embassy in Singapore to report on "The Future of Myanmar," covering the historical role played by the Myanmar government in preserving national unity and solidarity, efforts towards Myanmar's stability, and the progress and success of the peace process. As Time magazine is an internationally renowned media outlet, the request was responded to positively, and the Head of State met with Time magazine reporter Charlie Campbell and answered his questions. However, it was observed that when the interview was published on Time magazine's Online Media, it was not presented in the original question-and-answer format but was rewritten in an article format, and the content actually discussed during the interview was not comprehensively reflected, according to the statement. Furthermore, the statement noted that statements, interviews, and analyses from other individuals not included in the original interview were added, along with expressions that could mislead the international community's perception of the Myanmar government and Myanmar, and non-constructive reporting. It raises questions as to whether prioritizing other content over the originally agreed-upon interview topics constitutes adherence to Media Ethics. The original question-and-answer sessions between the Head of State and Time magazine reporter Charlie Campbell will continue to be released. Therefore, the Press Council issued a statement strongly condemning the reporting by Time magazine reporter Charlie Campbell, which did not accurately and comprehensively reflect the content of the original interview and instead added other content and analyses, as a violation of media ethics.