Tweet
MILLIYET DAILY A LAME DUCK, AS MEDIA CRISIS DEEPENS
Today's Zaman, Turkey
March 20 2013
by Yavuz Baydar
The crisis that enveloped the Milliyet daily, an old flagship among
the centre newspapers in Turkey, took a very sharp turn on Monday -
an event that implicates even more suffocation of the already badly
constrained media.
It reached its peak as Hasan Cemal (69), a veteran columnist
and internationally renowned media figure - author of several
groundbreaking books on Kurds, Armenians and journalism - resigned in
protest of his column being rejected by the power-fearing proprietor,
Erdogan Demiroren.
Both the censorship and his irrevocable decision to quit have
sent shockwaves not only around the country's tiny but vocal
liberal-reformist circles but also raised the debate on the state of
journalism to new levels.
As I gloomily predicted in my article titled "Crisis at a newspaper"
(March 12), the chain of events, triggered by a scoop on the minutes
of the meeting between Abdullah Ocalan and three Peace and Democracy
Party (BDP) deputies on Imrali Island, brought to the fore a new,
but a more severe, clash over the freedom to report by the newspaper.
The crisis escalated to great heights when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan lashed out at the newspaper for publishing the minutes, but
also quoted a line by Cemal's piece (defending journalism) and added,
"If this is journalism, down with it!"
The chain of events reads like a crystal-clear case study on how
ruthlessly the independence of the media is being strangled by power
politics and the "coalition of the willing" owner groups, who readily
serve their outlets on a platter to the political executive of Turkey.
Let me follow up on what happened, since Cemal was shown - due to
mismanagement of the editor - the "corner of shame" for two weeks by
his column being kept closed, silenced.
Known for his firm stand, integrity and consistency, Cemal (who had
proven his professional resilience during the time of the military
junta during the 1980s as the editor of Cumhuriyet) filed an article
at the end of the "ban." In it, he continued to defend the role of
journalism and criticized the attitudes of the media proprietors
and government.
Milliyet's editor, Derya Sazak, primarily responsible for publishing
the scoop, found himself in very rough seas. Knowing that there
already were a couple of telephone conversations between the prime
minister and the proprietor, he tried to negotiate for independence,
but in vain. He even tried to change the content of the column,
which Cemal categorically rejected.
The end result is a veteran colleague silenced and a newspaper that
from now on is a lame duck, with an editorial independence even more
severely damaged, forced to publish news coverage and opinion in an
even narrower scope.
At the time of the writing, Sazak had not handed in his resignation,
and many in the media wonder why he still stays in the post.
Within the media, very few "dared" comment on the case. Milliyet
sufficed with a brief note about the departure, while its columnists
preferred to ignore it. In general, his colleagues look the other
way either because other owners "ordered" them to do so, because they
fear losing their jobs or because they are hostile to Cemal's liberal
views. The indifference tells even more about the miserable state of
the media.
Responding to Erdogan, Cemal wrote in his censored piece: "I had
underlined a fundamental principle of my profession in those words. I
argued that journalism and ruling a country are separate issues,
and underscored the dividing line that set them apart. This was what
I was saying in a nutshell: In democracies, politicians rule the
country and reporters report!"
He continued: "Relations between the media and the government have
always been problematic in Turkey. Political power groups have always
tried to control the media and the journalists, with the red lines
that they themselves have drawn. They have exerted pressure through
economic, political and legal instruments. This has always been the
case. The economic interests of proprietors have given the political
power groups the upper hand. The owners' dependence on Ankara for
their economic interests coupled with the second-class judiciary in
Turkey have made it easier for the political power elite to manipulate
the media."
Today's Zaman, Turkey
March 20 2013
by Yavuz Baydar
The crisis that enveloped the Milliyet daily, an old flagship among
the centre newspapers in Turkey, took a very sharp turn on Monday -
an event that implicates even more suffocation of the already badly
constrained media.
It reached its peak as Hasan Cemal (69), a veteran columnist
and internationally renowned media figure - author of several
groundbreaking books on Kurds, Armenians and journalism - resigned in
protest of his column being rejected by the power-fearing proprietor,
Erdogan Demiroren.
Both the censorship and his irrevocable decision to quit have
sent shockwaves not only around the country's tiny but vocal
liberal-reformist circles but also raised the debate on the state of
journalism to new levels.
As I gloomily predicted in my article titled "Crisis at a newspaper"
(March 12), the chain of events, triggered by a scoop on the minutes
of the meeting between Abdullah Ocalan and three Peace and Democracy
Party (BDP) deputies on Imrali Island, brought to the fore a new,
but a more severe, clash over the freedom to report by the newspaper.
The crisis escalated to great heights when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan lashed out at the newspaper for publishing the minutes, but
also quoted a line by Cemal's piece (defending journalism) and added,
"If this is journalism, down with it!"
The chain of events reads like a crystal-clear case study on how
ruthlessly the independence of the media is being strangled by power
politics and the "coalition of the willing" owner groups, who readily
serve their outlets on a platter to the political executive of Turkey.
Let me follow up on what happened, since Cemal was shown - due to
mismanagement of the editor - the "corner of shame" for two weeks by
his column being kept closed, silenced.
Known for his firm stand, integrity and consistency, Cemal (who had
proven his professional resilience during the time of the military
junta during the 1980s as the editor of Cumhuriyet) filed an article
at the end of the "ban." In it, he continued to defend the role of
journalism and criticized the attitudes of the media proprietors
and government.
Milliyet's editor, Derya Sazak, primarily responsible for publishing
the scoop, found himself in very rough seas. Knowing that there
already were a couple of telephone conversations between the prime
minister and the proprietor, he tried to negotiate for independence,
but in vain. He even tried to change the content of the column,
which Cemal categorically rejected.
The end result is a veteran colleague silenced and a newspaper that
from now on is a lame duck, with an editorial independence even more
severely damaged, forced to publish news coverage and opinion in an
even narrower scope.
At the time of the writing, Sazak had not handed in his resignation,
and many in the media wonder why he still stays in the post.
Within the media, very few "dared" comment on the case. Milliyet
sufficed with a brief note about the departure, while its columnists
preferred to ignore it. In general, his colleagues look the other
way either because other owners "ordered" them to do so, because they
fear losing their jobs or because they are hostile to Cemal's liberal
views. The indifference tells even more about the miserable state of
the media.
Responding to Erdogan, Cemal wrote in his censored piece: "I had
underlined a fundamental principle of my profession in those words. I
argued that journalism and ruling a country are separate issues,
and underscored the dividing line that set them apart. This was what
I was saying in a nutshell: In democracies, politicians rule the
country and reporters report!"
He continued: "Relations between the media and the government have
always been problematic in Turkey. Political power groups have always
tried to control the media and the journalists, with the red lines
that they themselves have drawn. They have exerted pressure through
economic, political and legal instruments. This has always been the
case. The economic interests of proprietors have given the political
power groups the upper hand. The owners' dependence on Ankara for
their economic interests coupled with the second-class judiciary in
Turkey have made it easier for the political power elite to manipulate
the media."