Tweet
IS ERDOGAN RIGHT ABOUT COLUMNISTS?
Hurriyet
Friday, January 29, 2010
An important part of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's accusations
about some columnists that they are trying to instigate the government
is that he has said columnists are today more freely expressing
themselves, compared to seven years ago.
"If you comfortably write what you think today, have mercy. Ask
yourself if you were able to do this seven years ago," scolded Erdogan.
The argument branches out
This is not the first time that Mr. Prime Minister voices this out.
Obviously he believes that they have made progress in freedom of the
press in Turkey. Whether you agree or not, this is what he believes.
And we all know that Erdogan is awfully disturbed by criticisms on
this very subject too.
For instance, Mr. Prime Minister was seriously offended by questions he
has been posed frequently about pressure on Turkish media at various
think tank organizations during a trip to Washington. He had happened
to say that "Freedom of press in Turkey is much better than in the
United States."
It is impossible for us to agree with Erdogan. His argument may
be accurate partly. For instance, discussions are being made on a
broader spectrum compared to 2003. But let's not forget that this
has started way before the ruling Justice and Development Party,
or AKP, formed the government. Actually, discussions started when
Turkey became a European Union candidate in 1999.
It could be said that the number of military-related criticisms
within this time of period increased remarkably, or even boomed,
compared to seven years ago. Likewise, discussions over the Armenian
issue have also varied today.
If corruption news were considered
If we are here to make a really sound assessment over the progress
in freedom of press in the last seven years, we should, without
doubt, consider why some articles still cannot be written or why
they are written less. But let me say it first, corruption news,
for instance, is not made in Turkish media as used to be. There are
various reasons for that. In autumn 2008, for instance, a German court
in Frankfurt looked into a case related to corruption claims against a
Turkish charity organization called Deniz Feneri. As the Dogan Media
Group made news about it, the prime minister ran a campaign against
the group and suggested to others "to not buy their newspapers." How
could we easily forget this? Besides, it was not just a claim. It was
a legal case in which three individuals were sentenced to imprisonment.
As a matter of fact, two of three are still in prison.
After a heavy campaigning, journalists have to think twice while
making news especially if this may cost something to the government
or its supporters.
Following this particular campaigning, if we remember that the Dogan
Media Group was levied to pay over 4 billion Turkish Liras tax fine,
we should acknowledge the fact that journalism in Turkey has a heavy
price tag.
There is another problem here. Parallel to changes in property
rights, in the press the number of pro-government media members has
increased considerably. That unavoidably affects the content of Deniz
Feneri-related news being serviced to the public opinion.
Outside world sees differently
Another critical point is that the outside world thinks differently
of Erdogan when it comes to progress in freedom of press in Turkey.
Leading media in the Western world see freedom of the press in Turkey
as problematic.
For instance, in editorials of the Wall Street Journal, The New
York Times, and the Washington Post the Erdogan government is being
portrayed as an oppressive regime trying to keep independent media
silent through tax fines.
The European Commission in the latest progress report on Turkey cited
that political pressures on the media affect freedom of press. The
European Parliament likewise criticizes Turkey for the very same
reason in the Turkey report approved the other day.
In summary, there is a huge gap between the freedom of press perception
of the outer world and of the prime minister, as it has already been
confirmed the other day.
Hurriyet
Friday, January 29, 2010
An important part of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's accusations
about some columnists that they are trying to instigate the government
is that he has said columnists are today more freely expressing
themselves, compared to seven years ago.
"If you comfortably write what you think today, have mercy. Ask
yourself if you were able to do this seven years ago," scolded Erdogan.
The argument branches out
This is not the first time that Mr. Prime Minister voices this out.
Obviously he believes that they have made progress in freedom of the
press in Turkey. Whether you agree or not, this is what he believes.
And we all know that Erdogan is awfully disturbed by criticisms on
this very subject too.
For instance, Mr. Prime Minister was seriously offended by questions he
has been posed frequently about pressure on Turkish media at various
think tank organizations during a trip to Washington. He had happened
to say that "Freedom of press in Turkey is much better than in the
United States."
It is impossible for us to agree with Erdogan. His argument may
be accurate partly. For instance, discussions are being made on a
broader spectrum compared to 2003. But let's not forget that this
has started way before the ruling Justice and Development Party,
or AKP, formed the government. Actually, discussions started when
Turkey became a European Union candidate in 1999.
It could be said that the number of military-related criticisms
within this time of period increased remarkably, or even boomed,
compared to seven years ago. Likewise, discussions over the Armenian
issue have also varied today.
If corruption news were considered
If we are here to make a really sound assessment over the progress
in freedom of press in the last seven years, we should, without
doubt, consider why some articles still cannot be written or why
they are written less. But let me say it first, corruption news,
for instance, is not made in Turkish media as used to be. There are
various reasons for that. In autumn 2008, for instance, a German court
in Frankfurt looked into a case related to corruption claims against a
Turkish charity organization called Deniz Feneri. As the Dogan Media
Group made news about it, the prime minister ran a campaign against
the group and suggested to others "to not buy their newspapers." How
could we easily forget this? Besides, it was not just a claim. It was
a legal case in which three individuals were sentenced to imprisonment.
As a matter of fact, two of three are still in prison.
After a heavy campaigning, journalists have to think twice while
making news especially if this may cost something to the government
or its supporters.
Following this particular campaigning, if we remember that the Dogan
Media Group was levied to pay over 4 billion Turkish Liras tax fine,
we should acknowledge the fact that journalism in Turkey has a heavy
price tag.
There is another problem here. Parallel to changes in property
rights, in the press the number of pro-government media members has
increased considerably. That unavoidably affects the content of Deniz
Feneri-related news being serviced to the public opinion.
Outside world sees differently
Another critical point is that the outside world thinks differently
of Erdogan when it comes to progress in freedom of press in Turkey.
Leading media in the Western world see freedom of the press in Turkey
as problematic.
For instance, in editorials of the Wall Street Journal, The New
York Times, and the Washington Post the Erdogan government is being
portrayed as an oppressive regime trying to keep independent media
silent through tax fines.
The European Commission in the latest progress report on Turkey cited
that political pressures on the media affect freedom of press. The
European Parliament likewise criticizes Turkey for the very same
reason in the Turkey report approved the other day.
In summary, there is a huge gap between the freedom of press perception
of the outer world and of the prime minister, as it has already been
confirmed the other day.