Tweet
Sunday's Zaman, Turkey
Oct 18 2009
Turkish, Armenian journalists find similar problems in their
respective news coverage
As the northwestern province of Bursa hosted a historic soccer match
between the national soccer teams of Turkey and Armenia, journalists
from the two countries used the opportunity to exchange ideas on the
coverage of news related to each others' countries.
Researchers from both sides noted that there are the `same ills' and
`similar problems' in the media of the two countries. One problem that
the media in Turkey and Armenia suffer from is that they often follow
the `official' agenda.
Armenian and Turkish media experts who met at a conference on Oct.
13-14 shared the results of their study `Armenian-Turkish Relations in
the Armenian and Turkish Media,' completed through cooperation between
the Eurasia Partnership Foundation based in Yerevan and the Global
Political Trends Center (GPOT) based in Ä°stanbul.
The survey of the Turkish press during September and April of 2006,
2007 and 2008 included five dailies -- Hürriyet, Sabah, Radikal, Yeni
Å?afak and Zaman. The survey of the Armenian press included three
dailies -- Hayots Ashkhar, Aravot and Haykakan Zhamanak -- and two
news Web sites -- PanARMENIAN.Net and A1plus.am -- in the same time
period.
While noting that most Turkish-Armenian stories were published in
April, the period of the `Armenian issue' for the Turkish media,
journalist and researcher Suren Deheryan said the Turkish newspapers
that were surveyed published about 450 items with the keywords
`Armenia' and `Armenian' while the Armenian media outlets that were
surveyed published about 1,570 items with the keywords `Turkey' and
`Turkish.'
Coverage in the Turkish and Armenian media consisted mostly of news
articles, commentary and analysis. There was a notable absence of
interviews since only 3.6 percent of the news items in the Turkish
media were interviews.
`Their lack can signal two factors: either the media lacks the desire
to tell the other side's story or the actors in this conflict-laden
issue are not willing to tell their own stories,' said journalist and
researcher Ferhat Boratav, who studied the Turkish media. `Here, one
has to keep in mind the unwillingness of the politicians to talk
openly and sincerely on an issue that always incites negative
reactions from a considerable part of the public.'
There is a similar tendency in the Armenian media.
`The coverage consisted mostly of news stories, about 79.2 percent;
interviews, 7.6 percent; and commentary and analysis, 6.6 percent,'
Deheryan said.
In the Turkish press, it was the political agenda, by 61 percent,
which prompted news coverage while it was almost the same for the
Armenian press.
`The press follows closely the political or official agenda, at the
origin of most of the stories one finds a political act or
announcement,' Boratav stated.
In most stories, the main actors and sources are politicians and
officials and the main subjects of the stories covered are of a
political or diplomatic nature, according to the research.
`Human interest stories as well as non-political actors or sources are
noticeably absent,' Boratav added.
Another similarity between the coverage of the surveyed media outlets
is that the stories are told in a one-sided fashion. In the Turkish
press, Armenian sources and viewpoints reflecting the Armenian side
are under-represented. In the Armenian press, Turkish sources and
viewpoints reflecting the Turkish side are under-represented.
Boratav noted one radical change in the Turkish press after reviewing
the 450 stories.
`The headlines, clichés and expressions that represented a general
anti-Armenian bias in the Turkish media have mostly disappeared from
the mainstream press,' he said, although these practices survive in
marginal papers as they always target people working for
reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey. In addition, certain
clichés about Armenians are freely used in these publications,'
Boratav said.
Deheryan said there are stereotypes, clichés and a negative tone
toward Turkey in the Armenian media.
Journalists from both sides stressed that one way to overcome biases
is to continue exchange programs for journalists from the two
countries and evaluate the results.
18 October 2009, Sunday
YONCA POYRAZ DOÄ?AN Ä°STANBUL / BURSA
Oct 18 2009
Turkish, Armenian journalists find similar problems in their
respective news coverage
As the northwestern province of Bursa hosted a historic soccer match
between the national soccer teams of Turkey and Armenia, journalists
from the two countries used the opportunity to exchange ideas on the
coverage of news related to each others' countries.
Researchers from both sides noted that there are the `same ills' and
`similar problems' in the media of the two countries. One problem that
the media in Turkey and Armenia suffer from is that they often follow
the `official' agenda.
Armenian and Turkish media experts who met at a conference on Oct.
13-14 shared the results of their study `Armenian-Turkish Relations in
the Armenian and Turkish Media,' completed through cooperation between
the Eurasia Partnership Foundation based in Yerevan and the Global
Political Trends Center (GPOT) based in Ä°stanbul.
The survey of the Turkish press during September and April of 2006,
2007 and 2008 included five dailies -- Hürriyet, Sabah, Radikal, Yeni
Å?afak and Zaman. The survey of the Armenian press included three
dailies -- Hayots Ashkhar, Aravot and Haykakan Zhamanak -- and two
news Web sites -- PanARMENIAN.Net and A1plus.am -- in the same time
period.
While noting that most Turkish-Armenian stories were published in
April, the period of the `Armenian issue' for the Turkish media,
journalist and researcher Suren Deheryan said the Turkish newspapers
that were surveyed published about 450 items with the keywords
`Armenia' and `Armenian' while the Armenian media outlets that were
surveyed published about 1,570 items with the keywords `Turkey' and
`Turkish.'
Coverage in the Turkish and Armenian media consisted mostly of news
articles, commentary and analysis. There was a notable absence of
interviews since only 3.6 percent of the news items in the Turkish
media were interviews.
`Their lack can signal two factors: either the media lacks the desire
to tell the other side's story or the actors in this conflict-laden
issue are not willing to tell their own stories,' said journalist and
researcher Ferhat Boratav, who studied the Turkish media. `Here, one
has to keep in mind the unwillingness of the politicians to talk
openly and sincerely on an issue that always incites negative
reactions from a considerable part of the public.'
There is a similar tendency in the Armenian media.
`The coverage consisted mostly of news stories, about 79.2 percent;
interviews, 7.6 percent; and commentary and analysis, 6.6 percent,'
Deheryan said.
In the Turkish press, it was the political agenda, by 61 percent,
which prompted news coverage while it was almost the same for the
Armenian press.
`The press follows closely the political or official agenda, at the
origin of most of the stories one finds a political act or
announcement,' Boratav stated.
In most stories, the main actors and sources are politicians and
officials and the main subjects of the stories covered are of a
political or diplomatic nature, according to the research.
`Human interest stories as well as non-political actors or sources are
noticeably absent,' Boratav added.
Another similarity between the coverage of the surveyed media outlets
is that the stories are told in a one-sided fashion. In the Turkish
press, Armenian sources and viewpoints reflecting the Armenian side
are under-represented. In the Armenian press, Turkish sources and
viewpoints reflecting the Turkish side are under-represented.
Boratav noted one radical change in the Turkish press after reviewing
the 450 stories.
`The headlines, clichés and expressions that represented a general
anti-Armenian bias in the Turkish media have mostly disappeared from
the mainstream press,' he said, although these practices survive in
marginal papers as they always target people working for
reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey. In addition, certain
clichés about Armenians are freely used in these publications,'
Boratav said.
Deheryan said there are stereotypes, clichés and a negative tone
toward Turkey in the Armenian media.
Journalists from both sides stressed that one way to overcome biases
is to continue exchange programs for journalists from the two
countries and evaluate the results.
18 October 2009, Sunday
YONCA POYRAZ DOÄ?AN Ä°STANBUL / BURSA