Tweet
FREEDOM HOUSE REPORT ON TURKEY MISGUIDED
AL MONITOR
May 15 2014
Author: Rasim Ozan KutahyaliPosted May 15, 2014
Turkey obviously has problems with its freedom of press and
expression. I had acknowledged this reality in my two previous
Al-Monitor articles. But it is also true that significant progress has
been achieved in freedom of expression over the past 10 years. Until
a few years ago, "Kurdistan" was a taboo word. Anyone who used it
would instantly be declared a traitor by the mainstream media, and
prosecutors would seek prison sentences for the offenders.
Turkey today may still have some problems, but the former Kemalist
regime was an outright hell. The Turkish press had to call Kurdistan
"Northern Iraq." This nonsense is done with. Today, many writers freely
refer to Turkey's southeast as North Kurdistan. In the old Turkey,
if you called Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan "Mr. Ocalan," your media
career would have ended right there. If you spoke of Ocalan, you had
to add "master terrorist." Today, many commentators appear on major
TV channels and praise Ocalan's political attitude.
Only extreme nationalists and the pro-Fethullah Gulen movement media
denounce Ocalan and the Kurdish movement these days.
One of the major problems for freedom of press and expression in
Turkey has been the issue of the 1915 Armenian genocide. Under the
former regimes, you were required to outright deny it. Those like me
who said there was genocide would be tried under Article 301 of the
penal code. I have been there myself.
Turkey's Nobel Prize-winning author Orhan Pamuk had to leave Turkey
because of this situation. Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was made
an object of hate by the mainstream media and in the end, he was
assassinated.
Today, there is no legal risk in acknowledging the Armenian genocide.
Everyone is free to say what they want. I wrote eight successive
columns in mainstream daily Sabah, and said as a Turkish society,
we have to face the reality of the genocide. Five years ago, if I
wrote anything remotely like it, I would be taken to court.
But that there is a bizarre relationship between the government and
media bosses when it comes to freedom of the press cannot be denied.
This is nothing new, and hasn't changed under the Justice and
Development Party (AKP) rule. These media bosses want financial
perks and benefits from the state and use their media organs as
instruments of pressure and blackmail. The government, of course,
exploits the situation and frequently intervenes with the content of
their newspapers. These people frequently call on the prime minister
to intervene, which he does. As long as the media owners continue to
do business with the government, this bizarre situation will continue.
They must be legally banned from doing business with the state. This
is the real issue of press freedom in Turkey.
The Freedom House report did not even touch on this crucial issue. To
list Turkey behind Kuwait in its latest report is unfair. How can it
claim that the Kuwaiti media is freer than the Turkish one?
Let me expand on this with concrete examples. In Turkey, we have 40
daily newspapers with a total circulation of about 5,000,000. About
65% of this total (about 3,300,000) belongs to opposition newspapers.
Newspapers close to the ruling AKP have a total circulation of
1,200,000. Sports newspapers have a readership of 500,000.
The style of newspapers opposing Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is
extremely brutal. Dozens of daily newspapers constantly refer to him as
a "murderer," "thief" or "dictator." The pro-Gulen media label Erdogan
as "pro-al Qaeda" and "pro-Iran." According to newspaper headlines
from the extreme right and left, Erdogan is an American and Israeli
agent. Can the Kuwaiti media say anything similar about Kuwait's emir?
There is another interesting element. Freedom House was recognized
in Turkey because of the efforts of political science professor
Atilla Yayla, who is also the chairman of the Association for Liberal
Thinking. Western liberals should read Yayla's views carefully. The
winner of the Anthony Fisher Prize, Yayla was also given the Person of
the Year Award by the Stockholm Network in 2007. I personally think
that Freedom House project director Karin Deutsch Karlekar should
have consulted with Yayla when writing the report on Turkey.
As Turkish journalist Yildiray Ogur noted, the daily circulation of
opposition papers such as Sozcu, Yenicag, Cumhuriyet, Taraf, Sol,
Aydinlik, Yurt, Yeni Mesaj, Birgun, Today's Zaman and Orta Dogu is
above 700,000. They appear every day with the apparent motto of "What
did you do today to get rid of Erdogan?" They are dedicated to this
cause. There are about 1,000 columnists in the national press. These
writers, unlike any other group in the world, write between one to
eight articles a week, mostly on politics. Yesterday, the Turkish
newspapers printed 187 political columns. Of them, 123 were against
the government, while 64 supported it.
Meanwhile, we have heard Karlekar respond to the Turkish criticism
of the Freedom House report. She said the report was written by
a journalist-analyst who is well-known in the country and who is
well-informed about what is happening. His suggestions were discussed
at length and his points cross-checked with other sources, she said.
Who is this well-known and well-informed journalist-analyst who
wrote the Freedom House report? Karlekar said that unfortunately,
the analyst had to remain anonymous out of fear of the pressure he
may face, and had asked that his name not be disclosed.
As Ogur asked in his article, how can one be afraid of writing such
a polite report in a country where the mainstream media can suggest
spitting on Erdogan's grave and put Turkey in the same category as
North Korea?
How can we say that an analyst who gave Turkey the same points as
Egypt, which had a coup in 2013, is objective? How can that so-called
neutral, objective journalist claim that journalists who had been
released are still in prison? Karlekar responded saying that the
journalists in question were released at the beginning of 2014,
after the report was written.
The Freedom House report cited the number of detained journalists prior
to Dec. 1, 2013. But strangely, the report then talks of journalists
who were fired from their jobs after Dec. 17.
Why do we say the Freedom House report is unjust? According to liberal
Turkish intellectual Ali Bayramoglu, the Freedom House report is a
product of the same distortion as that which produced the negative
views of Turkey in the United States. This perspective is actually
tied to the AKP's Arab and Israeli policies, but distorted to appear
to emanate from anti-Westernism and a lack of press freedom.
There are many problems in the Turkish media, but to categorize Turkey
alongside North Korea as a non-free country is not a just approach.
Freedom House's report on Turkey's media was neither objective nor
impartial.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/05/freedom-house-turkey-report-misguided.html
From: A. Papazian
AL MONITOR
May 15 2014
Author: Rasim Ozan KutahyaliPosted May 15, 2014
Turkey obviously has problems with its freedom of press and
expression. I had acknowledged this reality in my two previous
Al-Monitor articles. But it is also true that significant progress has
been achieved in freedom of expression over the past 10 years. Until
a few years ago, "Kurdistan" was a taboo word. Anyone who used it
would instantly be declared a traitor by the mainstream media, and
prosecutors would seek prison sentences for the offenders.
Turkey today may still have some problems, but the former Kemalist
regime was an outright hell. The Turkish press had to call Kurdistan
"Northern Iraq." This nonsense is done with. Today, many writers freely
refer to Turkey's southeast as North Kurdistan. In the old Turkey,
if you called Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan "Mr. Ocalan," your media
career would have ended right there. If you spoke of Ocalan, you had
to add "master terrorist." Today, many commentators appear on major
TV channels and praise Ocalan's political attitude.
Only extreme nationalists and the pro-Fethullah Gulen movement media
denounce Ocalan and the Kurdish movement these days.
One of the major problems for freedom of press and expression in
Turkey has been the issue of the 1915 Armenian genocide. Under the
former regimes, you were required to outright deny it. Those like me
who said there was genocide would be tried under Article 301 of the
penal code. I have been there myself.
Turkey's Nobel Prize-winning author Orhan Pamuk had to leave Turkey
because of this situation. Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was made
an object of hate by the mainstream media and in the end, he was
assassinated.
Today, there is no legal risk in acknowledging the Armenian genocide.
Everyone is free to say what they want. I wrote eight successive
columns in mainstream daily Sabah, and said as a Turkish society,
we have to face the reality of the genocide. Five years ago, if I
wrote anything remotely like it, I would be taken to court.
But that there is a bizarre relationship between the government and
media bosses when it comes to freedom of the press cannot be denied.
This is nothing new, and hasn't changed under the Justice and
Development Party (AKP) rule. These media bosses want financial
perks and benefits from the state and use their media organs as
instruments of pressure and blackmail. The government, of course,
exploits the situation and frequently intervenes with the content of
their newspapers. These people frequently call on the prime minister
to intervene, which he does. As long as the media owners continue to
do business with the government, this bizarre situation will continue.
They must be legally banned from doing business with the state. This
is the real issue of press freedom in Turkey.
The Freedom House report did not even touch on this crucial issue. To
list Turkey behind Kuwait in its latest report is unfair. How can it
claim that the Kuwaiti media is freer than the Turkish one?
Let me expand on this with concrete examples. In Turkey, we have 40
daily newspapers with a total circulation of about 5,000,000. About
65% of this total (about 3,300,000) belongs to opposition newspapers.
Newspapers close to the ruling AKP have a total circulation of
1,200,000. Sports newspapers have a readership of 500,000.
The style of newspapers opposing Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is
extremely brutal. Dozens of daily newspapers constantly refer to him as
a "murderer," "thief" or "dictator." The pro-Gulen media label Erdogan
as "pro-al Qaeda" and "pro-Iran." According to newspaper headlines
from the extreme right and left, Erdogan is an American and Israeli
agent. Can the Kuwaiti media say anything similar about Kuwait's emir?
There is another interesting element. Freedom House was recognized
in Turkey because of the efforts of political science professor
Atilla Yayla, who is also the chairman of the Association for Liberal
Thinking. Western liberals should read Yayla's views carefully. The
winner of the Anthony Fisher Prize, Yayla was also given the Person of
the Year Award by the Stockholm Network in 2007. I personally think
that Freedom House project director Karin Deutsch Karlekar should
have consulted with Yayla when writing the report on Turkey.
As Turkish journalist Yildiray Ogur noted, the daily circulation of
opposition papers such as Sozcu, Yenicag, Cumhuriyet, Taraf, Sol,
Aydinlik, Yurt, Yeni Mesaj, Birgun, Today's Zaman and Orta Dogu is
above 700,000. They appear every day with the apparent motto of "What
did you do today to get rid of Erdogan?" They are dedicated to this
cause. There are about 1,000 columnists in the national press. These
writers, unlike any other group in the world, write between one to
eight articles a week, mostly on politics. Yesterday, the Turkish
newspapers printed 187 political columns. Of them, 123 were against
the government, while 64 supported it.
Meanwhile, we have heard Karlekar respond to the Turkish criticism
of the Freedom House report. She said the report was written by
a journalist-analyst who is well-known in the country and who is
well-informed about what is happening. His suggestions were discussed
at length and his points cross-checked with other sources, she said.
Who is this well-known and well-informed journalist-analyst who
wrote the Freedom House report? Karlekar said that unfortunately,
the analyst had to remain anonymous out of fear of the pressure he
may face, and had asked that his name not be disclosed.
As Ogur asked in his article, how can one be afraid of writing such
a polite report in a country where the mainstream media can suggest
spitting on Erdogan's grave and put Turkey in the same category as
North Korea?
How can we say that an analyst who gave Turkey the same points as
Egypt, which had a coup in 2013, is objective? How can that so-called
neutral, objective journalist claim that journalists who had been
released are still in prison? Karlekar responded saying that the
journalists in question were released at the beginning of 2014,
after the report was written.
The Freedom House report cited the number of detained journalists prior
to Dec. 1, 2013. But strangely, the report then talks of journalists
who were fired from their jobs after Dec. 17.
Why do we say the Freedom House report is unjust? According to liberal
Turkish intellectual Ali Bayramoglu, the Freedom House report is a
product of the same distortion as that which produced the negative
views of Turkey in the United States. This perspective is actually
tied to the AKP's Arab and Israeli policies, but distorted to appear
to emanate from anti-Westernism and a lack of press freedom.
There are many problems in the Turkish media, but to categorize Turkey
alongside North Korea as a non-free country is not a just approach.
Freedom House's report on Turkey's media was neither objective nor
impartial.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/05/freedom-house-turkey-report-misguided.html
From: A. Papazian