M4D 2019 Media Monitoring Report - media4democracy.org
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
This project is funded by the European Union
Bu proje Avrupa Birliği tarafından finanse edilmektedir
M4D 2019
Media Monitoring Report
An Association of Journalists Publication
This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Association of Journalists
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.
This project is funded by the European Union
Bu proje Avrupa Birliği tarafından finanse edilmektedir
Association of Journalists About the Association of Journalists
Board of Directors The Association of Journalists was founded on 10 January 1946 by
Chairman journalists Mekki Sait Esen, Niyazi Acun, Aka Gündüz, Bilal Akba, Adil
Nazmi Bilgin Akba, Sebahattin Sönmez and Muvaffak Menemencioğlu. The founding
purpose of the association was to unite journalists in different press
Deputy Chairman
organs under one roof, improve professional and social rights, and to
Savaş Kıratlı
safeguard the rights and freedoms of journalism which are imperative to
Vice Chairmen the profession.
Ertürk Yöndem, Ayhan Aydemir and Yusuf Kanlı Founding chairman Mekki Sait Esen headed the Association of
Secretary General Journalists between 1946 and 1956, he was succeeded by former senator
Ümit Gürtuna Ecvet Güresin between 1956-1957.
Financial Secretary Gazanfer Kurt, founder and owner of Kudret Newspaper, headed the
Mustafa Yoldaş association until 1959, then Atilla Bartınlıoğlu took over until 1960.
Former CHP member of parliament Altan Öymen was chairman of the
Members
association between 1960 and 1961, he was later succeeded by İbrahim
Güray Soysal, Ali Şimşek, Ali Oruç, Önder Yılmaz,
Cüceoğlu in 1961. Akis magazine manager and writer Metin Toker
Önder Sürenkök, Olgunay Köse ve Nursun Erel
became chairman of the Association of Journalists in 1962, after having
About the M4D Programme served a 7 month and 53-day prison sentence in 1957. Founding owner of
Media for Democracy/Democracy for Media Ekspress Newspaper Doğan Kasaroğlu took over as chairman in 1963
Project (M4D) is financed by the European Union until 1968, he was later appointed as general manager of TRT.
and implemented by the Association of Journalists Beyhan Cenkçi, who worked in positions such as general editor,
to strengthen pluralist media in Turkey as a safe- writer, editor-in-chief and executive editor for Yenigün, Ulus, Ankara
guard for democracy. The main goal of the project Telgraf, Ankara Ekspres and Dünya newspapers, was also chairman of the
is: To strengthen media pluralism in Turkey as a Journalists Union for five years. Cenkçi, who received a one-and-a-half-
safe-guard for democracy. year prison sentence along with some of his colleagues before 1960, was
Specific goals of M4D Project: The first goal elected as chairman of the Association of Journalists in 1969. He
of the programme is to establish a basis where plu- continued to serve as chairman of the Association of Journalists until
ralist and independent media can receive support by 1992. Cenkçi also served as senator in the Senate of the Republic during
his 24 years as chairman in the Association of Journalists.
the public, and to increase awareness in this regard.
Nazmi Bilgin, who started his professional career in 1971 in Son
The second goal of the programme is to establish a
Havadis Newspaper, worked as chief-in-editor and owner of Güneş
platform where journalists can increase their soli-
Newspaper, he later served as news director at Dünya Newspaper. Bilgin
darity and feel safe.
also worked as the parliament and Presidency correspondent for
For more information about M4D and the sup- Tercüman Newspaper. After having taken part in the founding of TRT-2,
ports we offer please visit: www.media4democ- he worked as “Senior Correspondent” and “General Manager Consultant”
racy.org in TRT for five years. Bilgin was elected as Chairman of the Association
Ó of Journalists unanimously in 1992. He founded the Federation of
This report was prepared by the Association of Journalists in Turkey in 1996, where he served as chairman until 2009.
Journalists Democracy for Media/Media for De- Bilgin served as the Ankara correspondent for BRT Television,he is
mocracy Project team using data collected from also a member and supervisor in the Turkish National Commission for
open sources, media screening, various applications UNESCO. He continues to serve as a member of the board of directors
and reports made to the project office. All content for the Public Advertisement Administration (BİK), and he is a member
in this report belongs to the responsibility of the As- of the board of trustees, board of directors of the Turkish Armed Forces
sociation of Journalists, it may be reproduced par- “Elele Foundation” and the Advertisement Agency.
tially or completely by giving reference, and may The Association of Journalists is as old as Turkey’s transition to a
be used in scientific publications. multi-party system, or in other words its transition to a pluralist
democracy. Our association started its journey with only a handful of
Editors: Yusuf Kanlı, Dr. Hülya Eraslan and journalists, today it has more than 2000 members, financial independence
and has become one of Turkey’s oldest, largest and most respected
Yıldız Yazıcıoğlu.
professional and non-governmental organizations.
Since its beginning in 1946, the Association of Journalists has relentlessly
Acknowledgements: We would like to thanks
stood by its country, and has vigilantly defended the republic, its pluralist
the following people for their diligence and com- democracy, the freedom of expression and freedom of the press. The
mitment in making this report possible: Esq. Association of Journalists has taken its rightful place among the respected
Gökhan Tekşen for his research and contribution, professional organizations of our country thanks to the reassurance it has
Naz Akman and the research team for their re- provided over the years.
search, Umut Irmaksever for his graphic work,
Esq. Tuncay Alemdaroğlu and Prof. Dr. Kork- ***
maz Alemdar for their much appreciated guidance, Telephone: +90 (312) 427 15 22
and finally we would like to thank Chairman of the Fax: +90 (312) 468 23 84
Association of Journalists Nazmi Bilgin for making E-Mail: info@gazetecilercemiyeti.org.tr
Website: www.gazetecilercemiyeti.org.tr
this report possible. Without their contribution, this
www.media4democracy.org
report would never have been completed.
Address: Üsküp Caddesi (Çevre Sokak) No:35, Çankaya, Ankara
This project is funded by the European Union
Bu proje Avrupa Birliği tarafından finanse edilmektedir
"Tree in the dark", courtesy of Gülsen Solaker
M4D 2019
Media Monitoring Report
An Association of Journalists Publication
This publication was produced with the financial support of the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Association of Journalists
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.
Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................... 2
General Situation-Climate of Freedom ............................................................................................................................ 2
Political parties and freedom of expression ............................................................................................................... 3
New political formations ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Atmosphere of the media in 2019 .............................................................................................................................. 5
Polarized media .......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Newspapers and television channels that have shut down or downsized................................................................... 5
Additional authority for RTÜK .................................................................................................................................. 6
Freedom of expression and human rights research .................................................................................................... 7
Foreign press .............................................................................................................................................................. 7
Freedom House: Not-free country .............................................................................................................................. 7
SETA report ............................................................................................................................................................... 8
Faruk Bildirici incident .............................................................................................................................................. 8
“My journalist; my media” ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Hate speech in the media ............................................................................................................................................ 9
Freedom of the press ........................................................................................................................................................ 9
Deunionization in the press ........................................................................................................................................ 9
Layoffs...................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Shock waves in Hürriyet .......................................................................................................................................... 12
Press trials continued full force ................................................................................................................................ 12
Press trials “welcomed” 2020................................................................................................................................... 20
Violence against journalists...................................................................................................................................... 21
Impunity ................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Imprisoned journalists .............................................................................................................................................. 22
Censorship ................................................................................................................................................................ 23
RTÜK fines .............................................................................................................................................................. 26
Press Advertising Authority measures ..................................................................................................................... 27
Media ownership ........................................................................................................................................................... 27
Has mainstream media become pro-government? ................................................................................................... 27
Opposition and minority group media...................................................................................................................... 28
Newspaper circulations .................................................................................................................................................. 29
Freedom of expression ................................................................................................................................................... 31
Accusations of insulting the President ..................................................................................................................... 32
Judicial reform package ................................................................................................................................................. 34
1. Amendments on freedom of expression and the press ......................................................................................... 35
2. Court of Appeals verdicts will be able to be investigated by the Court of Cassation .......................................... 35
3. Amendment regarding criticism and self-expression not constituting a crime .................................................... 36
4. Amendments regarding access restrictions to online content .............................................................................. 36
5. Amendment on postponement of public prosecution trials .................................................................................. 37
State of Emergency Commission................................................................................................................................... 37
Positive developments ................................................................................................................................................... 38
Public broadcasting ........................................................................................................................................................ 38
Observations .................................................................................................................................................................. 39
Assessment .................................................................................................................................................................... 41
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 41
Abreviations ................................................................................................................................................................... 44
Tables
Table 1 - Türk medyasında sendikalaşma / Unionization in Turkish media (Kaynak / source: TGS) .......................... 10
Table 2 - Tutuklu ve hükümlü gazeteciler / Detained and convicted journalists (2012-2019) ..................................... 22
Table 3 - Hükümlü, tutuklu gazeteciler / Sentenced or detained journalists (2019) ..................................................... 22
Table 4 - Birikimli erişim engellemeleri / Cumulative access restrictions (2012-2019) ............................................... 24
Table 5 - Sansür vakaları / Censorship cases (2014-2019) Kaynak / Source ÖiB ........................................................ 24
Table 6 - Yukarıda 2000 yılında medya sahşipliği. Aşağıda 2019 yılında medya sahiplik durumu / Above, media
ownership in 2000 and below media ownership in 2019. (Kaynak / Source: ÖiB) ................................................ 28
Table 7 - İktidarı destekleyen ve eleştirel medya tiraj payları - Pro-government and critical media circulation share
(2019) Kaynak / Source: ÖiB .................................................................................................................................. 29
Table 8 - Solda eleştirel, sağda ise hükümeti destekleyen medya sahiplik durumu / On left, critical media and on right
pro-government media ownership. (2019) Kaynak / Source ÖiB ........................................................................... 29
Table 9 - İktidar yanlısı ve eleştirel gazeteler kırılımında yıllık tiraj toplamları / Sum of yearly circulation on breakdown
of pro-government vs opposition newspapers (2015-2019) Kaynak / Source: http://gazetetirajlari.com/.............. 30
Table 10 - Gazete tirajlarına ilişkin detaylar (2019) / Details on newspapers' circulation (2019) ................................ 43
1
Introduction
This document was prepared by “Media for Democracy/Democracy for Media Project” (M4D)
implemented by the Association of Journalists and financed by the Delegation of the European Union
to Turkey to evaluate the situation surrounding the media in 2019.
M4D started in January 2019 and will last until April 2022, its primary goal is to strengthen both
media pluralism and the press in Turkey as a safeguard for democracy. The project also aims to establish
a conducive environment for journalists to feel safe and strengthen solidarity. The first year of M4D
project was quite busy, the National Committee was established, we opened our Press House where we
hosted many events and provided training; much work regarding data collection was also conducted. As
part of the project, we prepared and published three media monitoring reports in 2019, documenting
events between January-April, May-August and September-December. All data in the reports were gath-
ered from open sources, developments portrayed in the media and from the monthly reports prepared by
the Press for Freedom Project (PfF).
General Situation-Climate of Freedom
The agenda in 2019 was dominated by the “New Presidential System” and issues surrounding it.
One of the biggest developments of the year was the 31 March Local Elections which was followed by
a second mayoral election in Istanbul. Throughout the election process, many voiced criticism regarding
violations of freedom of expression and equal representation concerning electoral candidates and polit-
ical parties. According to data gathered from the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) the
Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT) responsible of public broadcasting did not give equal
air time to opposition parties during the elections and was heavily criticized for broadcasting content
critical of opposition parties. In addition, Demirören Media Group was heavily scrutinized for its por-
trayal of the Nation Alliance in the news, alleging terror connections while giving no say to HDP.
President Erdoğan defined “the Judicial Reform Strategy Document” he declared on 30 May as
“a commitment to EU accession”.1 President Erdoğan claimed this document would ameliorate viola-
tions regarding freedom of expression and the press through necessary legal arrangements. The first
package of the Judicial Reform Strategy Document called “The Criminal Procedure Code and the Law
Amending Certain Laws” was passed by the National Assembly on 17 October and became law.2
The document claimed that only in the past 16 years “important steps” had been taken regarding
freedom of expression and the press, yet no sources were provided about these steps.
The government was unable to achieve the results it wanted in the 31 March Local Elections. The
Nation Alliance, comprising of CHP and İyi Party, won in Ankara, Istanbul, Adana, Antalya and Mersin
while maintaining its presence in Izmir. This meant the Nation Alliance took over 5 of the 6 biggest
metropolitan municipalities in the country. The People’s Alliance was able to maintain its presence in
rural areas and small towns, while increasing the number of its district municipalities. President and
leader of the AKP Recep Tayyip Erdoğan claimed that the People’s Alliance was the victor of the elec-
tions by getting 51.67% of the total vote. In the East and Southeast regions of Turkey, HDP won in 8
provinces and in a significant number of counties and towns, some of which had been previously re-
placed by trustees appointed by the government. The Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) won in Tunceli
province which was the first time the party won a provincial province in an election.
One of the most surprising results of the 31 March Local Elections came from the Metropolitan
Municipality of Istanbul. CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu outvoted AKP candidate Binali Yıldırım in
the elections, this was not accepted first by the AKP and then by the Supreme Electoral Council (YSK).
YSK ruled to renew the elections on 23 June upon AKP’s call for re-election on grounds of “irregulari-
ties” in the voting process. This decision was met with heavy criticism since only the mayoral vote (one
1
http://www.sgb.adalet.gov.tr/ekler/pdf/YRS_TR.pdf
2
https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2019/10/20191024-25.htm
2of four ballot papers cast in the election) was cancelled. The Supreme Electoral Council’s controversial
decision was met with heavy public scrutiny on Twitter; many artists, intellectuals, citizens and CSO
representatives expressed criticism by sharing the hashtag “Everything will be alright”. These develop-
ments caused significant tension in the government. Muhammet Safi, Chairman of the Presidential Ar-
chive Department, shared a list of artists supporting İmamoğlu on Twitter with the note “the Record”.
Safi then hid his account due to public outcry. Following this, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made
the following remarks about the artists supporting İmamoğlu “You come to us and then you go behind
our backs and applaud these people... … we’re taking note of all of this”. Another noteworthy develop-
ment came from AKP Nevşehir Mayor Rasim Arı. Arı stated that artists who supported İmamoğlu would
not be allowed to hold events in Cappadocia. Artist Cahit Berkay claimed that he was not given an award
during the award ceremony “Türk Sinemasını Geleceğe Taşıyanlar” (Those Who Have Helped Bring
Cinema in Turkey to the Future) held by the “Turkish Cinematographic Work Owners Professional
Association” due to having supported İmamoğlu.
Following the decision for re-election in Istanbul, the struggles candidates faced in terms of the
media proved to be important in demonstrating what the world of communication has become in Turkey.
The gravity of the situation was best displayed when television show Tarafsız Bölge (Impartial Area)
on CNNTürk was cut short while hosting CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu; four cameramen working
on set were also fired. CNNTürk claimed the cameramen were not their own employees while Sözcü
newspaper owner Burak Akbay stated he would provide said cameramen with employment. Another
interesting development regarding the elections was the television debate moderated by journalist İsmail
Küçükkaya. CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu and AKP candidate Binali Yıldırım talked about their
election campaigns in the debate. Following the programme, President Erdoğan claimed İsmail Küçük-
kaya had been in contact with the CHP team and provided them with certain visual material at the Mar-
mara Hotel prior to the live debate. Sabah newspaper and A Haber news channel, who are known to be
close to the government, aired footage about the meeting which was criticized extensively. Küçükkaya
stated he had met the AKP team before the debate, as well. The smear campaign did not achieve the
results it set out to; the people of Istanbul elected Ekrem İmamoğlu once again.
Political parties and freedom of expression
Public broadcasting was another topic of debate in 2019. During the elections the media failed to
act impartially and objectively to each candidate; the Anatolian Agency abruptly stopped updating re-
sults during election night and access restrictions to the Supreme Electoral Council’s website were put
into effect; this caused significant reaction among the public. TRT and AA’s pro-government stance
during the elections called into question the concept of “public broadcasting”. Such that, during the 23
June 2019 Istanbul mayoral election the ANKA News Agency was established as an alternative to AA,
and proved to be very successful in its endeavour.
The effects of the 31 March Elections were felt throughout the year. The government continued
to appoint mayors to municipalities via the Ministry of Internal Affairs, that were won by opposition
parties in the local elections. In August mayors were appointed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs to the
municipalities of Diyarbakır, Van and Mardin belonging to HDP, despite the Supreme Electoral Council
having had no issue with the removed mayors running in the elections. As of the end of December, 31
municipalities belonging to HDP were appointed mayors by the government. In the final days of 2019,
CHP mayor of Urla Burak Oğuz was detained on grounds of having communicated with high ranking
FETÖ/PYD members by telephone. Removed from his position by the Ministry of Internal Affairs,
another mayor was appointed in Oğuz’s place. The government appointed mayors became a focal point
of criticism of the opposition yet the government stood by its decision on grounds of “anti-terrorism”
measures. Meanwhile, journalists covering protests against government appointed mayors were subject
to detention.
According to the annual Freedom House democracy index, Turkey remained vastly behind OECD
countries as well as being below the world average in 2019. In the second half of 2019, Turkey’s political
and military agenda was dominated by “Operation Peace Spring”. The operation was launched on
grounds of “anti-terrorism and securing the southern border of Turkey” on 9 October, the west defined
this act as “an offensive against the Kurdish people”. Following talks with the US and Russia, the Min-
istry of Defence declared it had ended “Operation Peace Spring” on 23 October, which had caused
3significant diplomatic tension between Ankara and Washington, such that the House of Representatives,
and then later the US Senate, recognized the events that unfolded in 1915 as “the Armenian Genocide”.
New political formations
All these developments brought with them new political formations in Turkey. First, former Dep-
uty Prime Minister Ali Babacan and then former Prime Minister Davutoğlu announced their resignations
from the Justice and Development Party (AKP), talks of new political parties made headlines. Many
claimed that these new political parties would cause the People’s Alliance and MHP to lose votes, and
in the case of future departures from the AKP it would prove very difficult for the government to get
more than 50% of votes in a Presidential election. Former Minister Faruk Çelik of AKP stated “a con-
stitutional amendment might be made that would reduce the electoral threshold to 40%”; Çelik’s state-
ment exposed talks among political circles surrounding the subject. Davutoğlu criticized the Presidential
System at the publicity meeting of his newly founded “Future Party” by saying: “It will be impossible
to sustain a democratic society as long as this system is in effect”.
Another noteworthy development in 2019 was President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan stating his dis-
comfort of using the word “Kurdistan” which he had used in the past. Following Erdoğan’s statement,
the Supreme Court of Appeals Prosecutor’s Office initiated court cases to shut down four political par-
ties which included the word “Kurdistan” in their names. The Attorney General initiated closure cases
against “Türkiye Kürdistan Partisi”, “Kürdistan Sosyalist Partisi”, “Kürdistan Özgürlük Partisi” and
“Kürdistan Komünist Partisi” on grounds of conducting unconstitutional activities.
Towards the end of the year on 10 December, many political parties and NGOs published reports
on rights violations in Turkey. CHP Human Rights Vice Presidency documented rights violations in
Turkey in its report “Insan Hakları ve Türkiye Raporu” (Human Rights Report of Turkey). According
to the report, the Constitutional Court, which is the highest legal authority before domestic remedies are
exhausted, deemed that only in 4.1% of individual applications it received since 2012 had been subject
to rights violations.
According to the ECtHR, out of its 146 rulings regarding Turkey in 2018, 140 had at least one
rights violation. The violations in question were headed by the right to freedom and security, the right
to a fair trial, and freedom of expression. In 2019, Turkey was once again associated with violations of
torture and degrading treatment, and violations of private life. According to rulings of the ECtHR in
2019, there were 17 cases of violations of torture and degrading treatment, 15 cases of the right to liberty
and security violations, 22 cases of freedom of expression violations, 7 cases of violations of freedom
of association, 31 cases of violations of private life and 34 cases of violations regarding the right to a
fair trial.
According to CHP’s report, human rights violations in Turkey have been increasingly docu-
mented by international reports in recent years, and Turkey’s human rights record has significantly re-
gressed according to many international indexes. Despite the State of Emergency having officially
ended, its effects can still be clearly seen. Many applications rejected by the Constitutional Court re-
sulted in rights violations decisions by the ECtHR. The Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency
Measures has rejected the vast majority of rights violation applications. The rulings of the Commission,
which is not autonomous, are neither open to the public nor are their justifications satisfactory. The
report also underlined the Commission should be abolished, paving the way for applicants to apply to
courts. Disproportionate restrictions to online content and media was also documented.
The report documented that mechanisms preventing forced disappearances were not sufficient,
and suspicions regarding grave human rights violations such as torture and forced disappearances have
significantly increased. It was also urged that the education system should transition to “a continuous
education system” to end discrimination based on sex, and replace the current system called “ the 4+4+4
system”.
According to the 2019 report prepared by HDP Law and Human Rights Commission, since 2015
the party was subjected to 15.530 arrests, around 6.000 people were detained among which 750 were
party members and party executives. The report also documented that since July 2015, 89 of the party’s
co-leaders, 193 district co-leaders and one town co-leader were arrested, while six HDP municipal co-
leaders and more than 50 of its city council members were not given their official mandates on grounds
4of having been expelled by statutory decree issued during the State of Emergency. As of December, 17
HDP co-leaders were arrested and 31 HDP municipalities were appointed mayors by the government
while 750 people working in the election campaign during the 31 March Local Elections were detained,
according to the report.
Atmosphere of the media in 2019
In 2019, problems surrounding the media and media workers, rather than being resolved, in-
creased drastically. The year was marked by an intensification in oppression and legal proceedings tar-
geting journalists; the number of unemployed journalists increased each day; cases of censorship and
self-censorship escalated; the media sector was deeply affected by the economic crisis; national and
local media outlets had to downsize or shut down; foreign journalists were refused renewal of their
accreditations; and Turkey continued to be one of the leading countries to imprison journalists.
The 10 January Working Journalists Day and 24 July Press Day were once again not celebrated.
The Association of Journalists, and other professional journalists’ associations, made statements on
these two important days highlighting the problems journalists face in Turkey. According to Reporters
Without Borders (RSF) annual World Press Freedom Index, Turkey ranked 157 out of 180 countries in
2019, remaining in the same place as last year. In the last 14 years, Turkey regressed 59 places in terms
of freedom of the press; according to the 2019 index, after China and countries in the Middle East,
Turkey has the highest number of professional journalists in prison.
Polarized media
According to KONDA’s media report between 2008-2018 the media in Turkey has become ex-
tremely polarized. This was considered to be the main obstacle preventing the establishment of an inde-
pendent and objective media environment. It was indicated that trust issues are quite evident in terms of
new media and the internet. The report documented that while pro-government voters rely on traditional
media for news, opposition party voters prefer alternative media outlets. According to KONDA, the
demand for alternative media outlets first started during the 2013 Gezi Park Protests. The report claims
that attitude towards social media were shaped by politicians demonizing social media outlets during
the Gezi Park Protests. It is worth noting that social media being perceived as “a nuisance for society”
coincides with the time President Erdoğan declared war on social media usage. The report also made
another interesting discovery: Those who follow pro-government media outlets for news do not consider
social media or the internet as news sources. There is a strong correlation with voting tendencies and
preferred news outlets. The report documented that those who watch Fox TV and Halk TV do not trust
news aired on TRT and ATV, while those who watch TRT and ATV do not trust Fox TV and Halk TV as
news sources. It was also indicated by the report that 75% still regard television as their primary source
for news; this was deemed to be the main cause for masses being unaware of opposition views and
lacking empathy and understanding towards each other.
Newspapers and television channels that have shut down or downsized
The effects of the economic crisis were felt throughout the media sector in January 2019, the
increase in input costs negatively affected national and local media. Local printed press outlets resorted
to reducing their number of staff and publication days to curb the effects of the economic crisis. While
most local newspapers started to publish three days a week, the Anatolian press decided to only publish
on Sundays. Mainstream media was also considerably affected by the economic crisis. Biased reporting
was enough to dissuade people from reading newspapers. Readers in search of alternative media outlets
played a role in the decrease of newspaper sales, this brought with it downsizing in mainstream media
Following the closure of long-established Olay newspaper in Bursa and Haber Medya Grubu in
Samsun, the Association of Journalists, the Confederation of Journalists in Turkey and other NGOs
working in the media field have voiced their concerns about the increase in input costs, lack of official
advertisement/announcement support that have resulted in around 1150 local newspapers to reduce the
number of pages they publish, downsize their staff and having had to resort in many cities to publish
only at the weekend or a single day of the week. NGOs warned that 125 local newspapers had to shut
down this year, and if the necessary precautions are not taken many more newspapers will have to close
their doors. In the final few days of the year, Star newspaper announced it would be publishing solely
5online and Güneş newspaper announced that it would be closing its doors; this demonstrated that shrink-
age in the media sector was not limited to local media.
In 2018 the closure of Habertürk set an example for many publishing groups. In January, follow-
ing the sale of Doğan Media Group to Demirören Media group, “Güncel Hukuk Dergisi” which was
published for 15 years had to stop its publication. Sözcü group had to stop the publication of AMK (Açok
Mert Korkusuz) Spor. Newspapers Karaman Gündem, Yeni Karaman, Karaman’da Uyanış, Gazete
Anadolu, Karaman’ın Sesi and Karaman Gazetesi, all which are published in Karaman, decided to only
publish three days a week. In Diyarbakır, nine local newspapers announced they would be publishing
only on Sunday due to increase in input costs. In Malatya, Malatya Flaş Haber, Malatya Olay and Öz
Haber announced they would be conducting joint publishing from now on. FlashTV stopped broadcast-
ing for a short period citing financial difficulties; it started broadcasting again but this time with low
budget productions. The economic crisis forced channels such as TV8, CNNTürk and TRT to structurally
downsize.
Samsun’s only local television channel Haberaks TV ended its broadcast life. Haber Media Group,
which owned Haber newspaper and Haber Radio, shutdown all its outlets. Local newspapers in Sinop
and Kocaeli issued a joint statement requesting the Press Advertising Authority (BİK) to regulate its
official advertisement revenues fairly. 12 local newspapers issued a joint statement under the heading
“Protect Your Local Press Sinop!” emphasizing the financial fragility of local press organizations in
comparison to national media outlets, and requested support from the local people. During the statement
the following was said: “Protect your local newspapers, radios and news sites from those who want to
render you blind, deaf and dumb”.
Additional authority for RTÜK
In August 2019, RTÜK issued new regulations concerning online television broadcasts of online
channels such as Netflix, BluTV and Puhutv According to article 24 “Regulation on Radio, Television
and Voluntary Online Broadcasts” content aired online both domestically and internationally will be
subject to RTÜK supervision. The regulation states that channels broadcasting from abroad are obliged
to establish companies in Turkey. Those who wish to broadcast online will be subject to a 100.000 TRY
license fee. Following the regulation entering force, the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA)
stated they would be applying to the Council of State for its cancelation. MLSA Co-Director Veysel Ok
underlined that the new regulations would instate RTÜK with regulative power above the law. Ok said:
“These regulations are in violation of freedom of expression, the right to be informed and to circulate
news. First of all, we believe that making online broadcasts subject to fees will restrict the right of
circulating news since many journalists use online platforms to broadcast news. These journalists
shouldn’t be subject to a licensing fee. These regulations are in violation of the constitutional rights to
create news, circulate news and the public’s right to be informed. Also, the regulations being quite am-
biguous is problematic as well. Since the regulations do not define what a news platform is and what
isn’t, we can’t really talk about a specified standard. The regulations could affect journalists broadcast-
ing news by themselves, such as “bloggers” on Youtube. We are concerned that the new RTÜK regula-
tions will restrict constitutional articles 25 and 26 regarding freedom of expression and freedom of
thought, also articles 28 and 29 regarding freedom of the press”.
RTÜK made the following statement in its defence regarding appeals made for the cancellation
of said regulations “The premise that journalists running non-profit websites at such a small scale that
they would not be able to pay licensing fees are unfounded, inasmuch as the Regulations serve to regu-
late not news websites but media service providers broadcasting online. Claims that radio stations not
being able to pay 10.000 TRY for a 10-year license, and television and voluntary online broadcasters
not being able to pay 100.000 for a 10-year license is against the ordinary flow of life. Inasmuch, clause
four of article seven of the Regulation clearly states that licensing fees can be payed directly or in in-
stalments”. RTÜK also claimed that MLSA would not be able to initiate a court case since RTÜK had
not “violated anyone’s interest”.
Meanwhile, according to the survey report of the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human
Rights presented in November 2019, statutory decrees issued during the State of Emergency as well as
6RTÜK’s disproportionate fines have significantly damaged freedom of expression. The survey docu-
mented increased forensic investigations and penalties targeting freedom of expression while Turkish
authorities have relentlessly removed content from social media. The report also underlined that more
than half of the submissions it receives regarding internet restrictions come from Turkey.
Freedom of expression and human rights research
Amnesty International Turkey and MetroPOLL Strategic and Social Research Center’s joint re-
port titled “Turkey’s Perceptions on Human Rights” revealed an increase in public perception regarding
human rights violations. According to the research, surveys conducted in 28 provinces showed that 82%
of the population believe there are human rights violations while 53.3% of the population believe that
fundamental human rights are protected by law. The survey also showed that 43.8% felt comfortable
sharing their beliefs among other people while 43.4% expressed they can freely share their opinions on
social media. A question included in the survey “Can people in Turkey freely express their beliefs?”
was answered as “no” by 52.4% of the population while only 37.7% believed that ideas and beliefs can
be freely expressed. According to the report 75.3% of the population supported peaceful protests and
75% believed the police should not use violence against public demonstrations. The survey showed that
only 45.2% of the population was optimistic about the future of human rights.
Foreign press
The foreign press has also been negatively affected by the regression in freedom of the press.
Certain foreign media organizations and their correspondents in Turkey were subjected to accreditation
measures which prevented them from working in the country. Foreign journalists being denied press
cards especially during the election process was met with criticism. Tragesspiegel reporter Thomas
Seibert, ZDF TV Istanbul Correspondent Jörg Brase and NDR reporter Halil Gülbeyaz’s applications for
press card renewal were rejected. British newspaper Morning Star editor Steve Sweeney was detained
while trying to enter Turkey to cover the local elections. Sweeney was deported the following day. In
addition, certain foreign journalists were not accepted to “the EU-Turkey High Level Economic Dia-
logue Meeting 2019” held in the Dolmabahçe Presidential Office in Istanbul, on grounds they did not
have valid press cards. During a meeting with Minister of Finance and Treasury Berat Albayrak, Euro-
pean Commission Vice-President Jyrki Katainen criticized this development by saying “Press freedom
is a fundamental right around the world”. It has been claimed that the issue regarding these journalists
of whom the majority have been working in Turkey for more than ten yeas “has largely been resolved”
as of late April, but issues concerning “a few cases” remain.
Official judicial violations targeting journalists were documented in detail by international organ-
izations lead by the International Press Institute in their report “Turkey’s Journalists in the Dock: Judicial
Silencing of the Fourth Estate” and urged the government to put positive regulations into action.
Despite the advocacy work conducted by professional organizations around the world under the
slogan “Journalism is not a crime” aiming to raise awareness of imprisoned journalists and media work-
ers in Turkey, pre-trial detentions continued in 2019. By the end of November 2019, there were 120
imprisoned journalists, 48 having received a sentence and 72 in detention or under arrest. In December
this number increased to 121.
Between 1 January- 30 November a total of 319 journalists were subjected to legal proceedings.
United Nations (UN), Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Free-
dom of Opinion and Expression, David Kaye, contended that Turkey has not been showing a serious
effort in preventing rights violations. Kaye also stated that oppression journalists face has continued to
increase and “terrorism” accusations targeting journalists has made it impossible to practise the profes-
sion.
Freedom House: Not-free country
Turkey was once again considered to be among “not free” countries in Freedom House’s “Free-
dom on the Net 2019 Report”. The report included 87% of all internet users in the world, 65 countries
were evaluated as “free”, “partly free” and “not free”. The evaluation was made according to the fol-
lowing criteria “obstacles to access, limits on content, violations of user rights”. Turkey scored 37 out
of 100 and was once again considered to be a “not-free” country. Among other European countries
7evaluated in the report such as Iceland, Estonia, Germany, UK, Italy and France, Turkey was considered
to be the only “not free” country.
SETA report
One of the biggest developments of 2019 was the SETA report that documented information about
journalists working for international media organizations or those who contributed to said media organ-
izations. The report titled “International Media Outlets' Extensions in Turkey” was considered to have
blacklisted journalists. The 196-page report was prepared by SETA team members İsmail Çağlar, Kev-
ser Hülya Akdemir and Seca Toker. The document contained detailed information about journalists and
their social media activity working for BBC Türkçe, DW Türkçe, VOA Türkçe, Sputnik Türkiye, Eu-
ronews Türkçe, Independent Türkiye and CRI Türk; remarks branding journalists “anti-government”
were also made in the report. The report called for intervening on how international media organizations
view developments in Turkey, to exercise disciplinary measures through journalists, even going as far
as calling for the intervention of social media of the journalists in question. This is unacceptable in terms
of freedom of expression. The report sparked reaction from the Association of Journalists, DİSK Basın-
İş Union, ÇGD, TGC, TGS, Haber-Sen, TYS, RSF, Gazeteci Dayanışma Ağı (Journalist Solidarity Net-
work), as well as political parties, bars and the European Commission. Association of Journalists Chair-
man Nazmi Bilgin expressed his concerns by saying “It is sad to see the outstanding efforts of our
colleagues in trying to let the global community know of the developments in Turkey is being punished
and blacklisted instead of being praised. It is also very thought-provoking and startling that a think-tank
has produced and published this embarrassing piece of work. We condemn this”. Despite causing na-
tional and international reaction, the termination of employment contracts of some of the journalists
targeted in the SETA report raised concerns.
New names were appointed to the 12-person government group in the 36-person General Assem-
bly of the Press Advertising Authority. Among the appointed were director and rapporteur of SETA
which had targeted journalists working in international media organizations. President Erdoğan, prior
to appointing these 12 members, had appointed the General Directorate of the Security Council member
and SETA Coordinator Burhanettin Duran’s brother Rıdvan Duran to the Head Office of the Press Ad-
vertising Authority.
In September, RTÜK Chairman Ebubekir Şahin was appointed to the Press Advertising Author-
ity’s (BİK) General Board as “government representative”. This appointment was in contradiction of
RTÜK rules and many voiced their criticism of the decision. RTÜK member Faruk Bildirici submitted a
petition to the Grand National Assembly and RTÜK Presidency for RTÜK Chairman Ebubekir Şahin “to
be considered retired from his position in RTÜK” due to his dual membership of the General Board of
the Press Advertising Authority and being a member of the Executive Board of TÜRKSAT. Bildirici
stated that Şahin’s position in RTÜK should be revoked “due to its ethical and illegal circum-
stances”. Bildirici said: “members of regulatory and supervisory institutions can be appointed to the
executive boards of public bodies and institutes, and to companies run by institutes whose major share
of capital is owned by the state ‘provided it is not related to the field of duty of the institution’. Whereas
BİK and TÜRKSAT are active in RTÜK’s field of duty. This results in a conflict of interest.”
Faruk Bildirici incident
Hürriyet newspaper Ombudsman Faruk Bildirici was one of the many people to have been di-
rectly affected by violations targeting journalists in 2019. Bildirici had to say goodbye to Hürriyet news-
paper in March where he had worked for 27 years. Faruk Bildirici, who was elected as a member of the
RTÜK from the CHP quota in the Turkish Grand National Assembly in July, was dropped at the RTÜK
board meeting by six votes against two by AKP and MHP at the end of October on grounds of Bildirici’s
alleged illegal actions and statements. The Supreme Board claimed that Bildirici had lost his political
objectivity and his impartiality regarding the media service providers RTÜK is responsible of regulating
and supervising. The board also claimed that Bildirici had breached the confidentiality of its meetings,
had opposed its rulings and targeted the Supreme Board and its members. Bildirici, on the other hand
stated that injustice had prevailed and he had paid the price of his opposition by his membership being
revoked. Bildirici also stated that he would be taking this injustice to court. This action, said Bildirici,
was a first in RTÜK’s 25-year history and could set a dangerous example for democracy. lhan Taşçı,
8who was elected from the CHP quota and Ali Ürküt, who was selected from the HDP quota, objected to
the revocation Bildirici’s membership.
Meanwhile, RTÜK Chairman Ebubekir Şahin left his position as TÜRKSAT Executive Board
member following Bildirici’s criticism of Şahin receiving a salary and working for another organization,
which is against RTÜK’s rules. CHP nominated Bildrici once again as a candidate for RTÜK member-
ship in the General Assembly of the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
“My journalist; my media”
The Directorate General of Press and Information (BYEGM) was absorbed by the Directorate of
Communication on July 25, 2018. Following this development, the Press Card Commission gathered
for the first time on 24 July 2019 without disclosing to the public and in the context of the new regula-
tions that had been prepared without consulting the sector. The new structure of the Commission was
harshly criticized by professional organizations and opposition parties for only including pro-govern-
ment names and for not having given place to professional organization representatives. Professional
organizations declared that it is unacceptable for the state or a state-led commission to decide on who a
journalist is.
In February, the Progressive Journalists’ Association (ÇGD) applied to the judiciary in order to
cancel the controversial articles in the new Press Card Regulation published in the Official Gazette on
December 14, 2018 and to stop its enforcement. ÇGD also filed a lawsuit in the Council of State to stop
the new press card regulations that deeply concern the profession of journalism.
Hate speech in the media
According to the Hrant-Dink Foundation’s quarterly “Media Report on Hate Speech” there have
been 1.299 news articles and columns targeting national, ethnic and religious minorities. The report says
these texts contained 1.575 hate-speech remarks targeting 46 different groups. Yeni Akit, with 100 arti-
cles containing hate-speech, had the highest hate-speech content out of any newspaper. On the other
hand, the report did not find any hate-speech in BirGün and Evrensel newspapers.
Freedom of the press
Turkey painted a bleak picture in terms of freedom of the press in 2019. Still remaining in 157th
place in press freedom indexes, Turkey has become one of the fastest regressing countries in terms of
press freedom in the last 10 years. Journalists in Turkey have been rendered unable to practise their
profession due to the political climate of the country. The number of journalists made redundant due to
political or economic reasons have been increasing each year. The economic crisis has reached such an
extent that it poses a direct threat to the livelihood of journalists. Journalists striving to inform the public
and do what their jobs require them to do, have not only been subjected to symbolic violence but have
been physically attacked. Furthermore, those who have inflicted physical violence on journalists, rather
than being punished, were virtually praised for their actions. Journalists who have been critical of the
government have not only been beaten up, but also have also been thrown into prison, continued to be
the subjects of press cases and have been forced to self-censor.
Deunionization in the press
Issues regarding independent media ownership and unionization, which are imperative for objec-
tive and unbiased journalism, have proven to be a problem time and time again by developments in
Turkey. As has been seen in the mass layoffs in Hürriyet newspaper, unions organizing in complicity
with the government and the effective deunionization in the press sector has disposed of any job security
the press had and has significantly hindered freedom of the press.
A key problem that has been underlined by report prepared by the Association of Journalists is
deunionization policies targeting the press. Despite the rate of unionization being 66% in 1995, there
has been significant regression over the years: in July 2019 the rate of unionization was 7.56%, in De-
cember 2019 the rate of unionization was 7.79%, this shows us that the media sector in Turkey has
virtually been rendered deunionized and unorganized.
9Table 1 - Türk medyasında sendikalaşma / Unionization in Turkish media (Kaynak / source: TGS)
Independent journalism cannot be protected without professional solidarity, as long as journalists
do not have job security, and are subject to the endless spiral of trying to make ends meet. Journalists
should act to protect their unions and job security while trying to provide the public with independent
and objective news, and should not be subjected to the smear campaigns of politicians or left alone to
the mercy of their bosses
It is impossible for journalists to produce unbiased news while their fates lay in the hands of the
political power or media bosses.
Layoffs
The political atmosphere, economic problems and legal proceedings regarding freedom of ex-
pression and the press forced journalists into unemployment in 2019. Many people announced their
resignations from the media organization they worked for without giving reason.
TV8 parted its way with 20 of its staff in the first month of the year. Demiören Media Group fired
Özden Aydos, Hakan Özbek, Murat Aydın and Murat İnceoğlu who had been working for cnnturk.com.
Hürriyet newspaper’s website hurriyet.com.tr sports department manager Timuçin Eriç, sports editor
Ozan Öztürk, news editors Hakan Alkan and Songül Dalgıç Bilgili, video editor Nur Tütüncü and cop-
ywriter Sebla Koçan were all laid off.
Communication faculty students were also affected by the climate of oppression in 2019. Akdeniz
University Faculty of Communication Dean Ahmet Aydın shut down the university’s Akdeniz İletişim
Haber Ajansı (AKİL) due to having conducted interviews with former CHP member of parliament and
journalist Barış Yarkadaş and journalist İsmail Saymaz.
Demirören Media Group continued its layoffs in February. Executive producer Şafak Ongan of
Dream TV, Radyo D and CNNTürk Radyo was laid off, and Finance Manager Yeliz Karafat of Demören
TV (Kanal D) announced her resignation. It has been reported that Dünya newspaper editor-in-chief
Hakan Güldağ resigned from his position. It was noted that Güldağ had opposed to a list given to him
by the paper’s administration containing names that were supposed to be fired. Karar writer Ahmet
Taşgetiren was fired from his position in Erkam Radyo due to his remarks critical of the AKP. Sporx
website editor-in-chief Tahir Kum was also forced to leave his position. The website Sporx had exposed
the Qatari company beIN Sports to have caused the Turkish Football Federation (TFF) 80 million dollars
in damages due to contractual obligations.
In March, 23 staff members were fired from FlashTV. Hüseyin Torun, a reporter for Yerel Pusula
newspaper published in Gaziantep, said that he was "forced to leave because of the pressure of the
political will". Hürriyet Ombudsman Faruk Bildirici was fired after having worked 27 years of the news-
paper.
The development that made the biggest noise took place in Halk TV in April. Lale Özan Arslan,
Semra Topçu, Rahmi Aygün, Barış Yarkadaş, Atakan Gültekin, Gökhan Demirel and Bülent Mumay
and his crew in charge of the website were laid off from Halk TV right after the 31 March Local Elec-
tions. Following Halk TV Executive Editor Serhan Asker’s decision to lay off staff under the guise of
10You can also read
