A 'so-called' press conference from Bahçeli

A 'SO-CALLED' PRESS CONFERENCE FROM BAHÇELİ

If I call MHP Chairman Devlet Bahçeli’s press conference “so-called,” I would be using this term quite appropriately, contrary to the general habit in our media.

I say “so-called” because the first four rows of seats in the hall were occupied by MHP officials. Journalists were sitting in the back rows behind the party members; the cameras were also at the very back. Throughout his speech, Bahçeli was actually addressing the party members.

After he finished his statement, when Bahçeli asked, “Are there any friends who have questions, sir?”, there was silence from the journalists for a long time. Then, two questions were asked as a formality, ending with “…how do you evaluate this, thank you,” regarding the US elections and stray dogs. 

After answering them, Bahçeli once again asked, “Are there any others, sir?” waiting for questions. But when there was no sound from the journalists in the hall, he himself touched upon the “list of 154 people that the MHP submitted to the court where the Sinan Ateş case is being heard.”   

Just think, there are 63 journalists on the list of 154 people that the MHP complained about and targeted, and the journalists in the hall cannot muster the courage to ask about the purpose of such a list or the consequences it will create. Moreover, Sinan Ateş’s wife, Ayşe Ateş, had revealed just a week ago that Sinan Ateş had journalists beaten under the instructions of the Headquarters while he was the Chairman of the Ülkü Ocakları.

The journalists in the hall could not bring up the allegations regarding the relationship between the MHP, Ülkü Ocakları, and the Sinan Ateş murder, nor could they even ask about Bahçeli’s health. Yet, Bahçeli was only able to deliver his speech while sitting at the last group meeting on June 25, and could only stand up with the help of party members. There had been no group meeting for three weeks! Four weeks later, he was holding a “press conference” in lieu of a group meeting, again while sitting…

A meeting organized by a party that puts pressure on those who ask questions, and where journalists who might dare to ask questions are not even admitted, deserves to be called a “so-called press conference.”      

IT WAS AN ATTACK, NOT A FIGHT

In the evening, AHaber, CNNTürk, Hürriyet, Ekonomim, Sözcü, Milliyet, NTV, Gerçek Gündem, TGRT, Sputnik, and Yirmidört TV announced the event with headlines like “Kicked and punched fight in Parliament,” “Fists spoke again in Parliament,” and “Fight again in Parliament.” Sabah published it as “DEM provocation in the TBMM again,” and Yeni Şafak as “DEM strained the Parliament.” 

However, these reports included photos and footage showing AKP deputies Adil Karaismailoğlu and Halil Eldemir slapping, punching, and kicking DEM deputy Ali Bozan. The AKP deputies, angered by Bozan’s words at the podium, had attacked him; Bozan had not retaliated.

This means it was an attack, not a fight. Covering up the violence of the AKP figures by presenting a kick-and-punch attack visible to the naked eye as a “fight” does not befit journalism. Judgments regarding DEM or affection for the AKP should not lead to distorting the truth. 

Indeed, in many newspapers and websites, the event was reported with headlines such as “'You are thieves' fight in Parliament: AKP members attacked DEM deputy,” “Punch from former minister to deputy,” “Karaismailoğlu slapped Bozan who said 'Thief',” “Former minister punched DEM deputy,” and “Karaismailoğlu slapped DEM’s Bozan.” This was the correct way to report it… 

The MHP’s publication, Türkgün, praised Karaismailoğlu, saying “Bless your hands.” Some of the President’s Chief Advisors, Oktay Saral, AKP and MHP deputies, and some pro-government journalists also joined the race to congratulate Karaismailoğlu. 

Such open support for violence, especially violence directed at a member of parliament, is worrying in terms of journalism and democracy.      

'ORGANIZE YOUR OWN LAUNCH' 

A new era has begun in the “media promotion” organizations of automobile companies! Renault did not invite automotive writers to another city or country as usual for the promotion of the new Duster model; it made a different invitation:

“Let us leave the vehicle wherever you want. You organize your own launch. Travel on the route you want, with the people you want, and we will cover the expenses. Leave the vehicle wherever you want.”

This invitation went to 20-30 journalists and social media influencers; while some actually tested the car on mountains and hills, others chose to travel with their families and get a free vacation. The purpose of testing a vehicle should be to determine its pros and cons and convey them in an objective language. 

In the “organize your own launch” organization, it doesn’t happen that way; the opportunity to talk to company executives and experts and ask questions disappears; journalists voluntarily accept being part of a promotional activity. While traveling with the car, they also promote it by praising the vehicle through social media posts and programs.

When I scanned social media, I saw an automotive writer who went up to 3,000-meter plateaus to experience the vehicle, as well as someone who traveled with their spouse and daughter and posted with the hashtag “…family-sized adventure.” The car test becomes a “reward” from the company to the journalist and their family; the relationship moves beyond journalism. 

WHY IS SCREEN POWER NOT ENOUGH? 

RTÜK Chairman Ebubekir Şahin reacted to a post by NOW TV main news anchor Gülbin Tosun, in which she tagged President Erdoğan, by saying “Know your place.” 

Şahin’s reaction on social media is clearly an overreach of authority. Because social media posts of television presenters are not within the scope of RTÜK’s duties. RTÜK is an organization responsible for supervising television broadcasts; it cannot interfere with social media and posts there.

Gülbin Tosun also pushed the boundaries of journalism with her post about the draft law on stray dogs: “We will not let them be killed! You know that, right? Do not cause an uprising never seen in world history @RT Erdoğan.” Although it was not a threat, she shifted to an activist line by mentioning an “uprising” in which she would also be involved.

However, Gülbin Tosun can present news criticizing that draft law; she can convey her opinion to the audience. Not being content with taking a stance on screen and acting like an activist on social media is underestimating the power of journalism. As in this example, it also harms the identity of a journalist.

THEY PRODUCED HOSTILITY FROM A FRIENDSHIP CONCERT

As soon as it was heard that Greek artist Despina Vandi did not take the stage due to the Turkish flag and Atatürk portrait on the stage, the headlines lost their measure: “Greek, don't itch, don't push our patience” (Sözcü), “Arrogant Greek” (Akşam/Sözcü), “The never-ending grudge of the Greek” (Korkusuz)

Most importantly, the journalistic reflex could not be shown from the moment the crisis was learned. It was written that Vandi wanted the Turkish flag and Atatürk portrait on the stage to be removed or for the Greek flag to be hung to balance it, but the flag could not be found and hung. But how the crisis emerged and what happened in Çeşme that evening could not be conveyed from the mouths of the parties. 

Although Turkish Education Foundation (TEV) officials still could not be made to speak, Despina Vandi made a statement to the main news bulletin of Star television in Greece and to journalist Anna Stamatiadou. It turns out she was actually against the Atatürk portrait. She wanted “the Atatürk portrait to be moved to another part of the event and the Greek flag to be placed next to the Turkish flag.” TEV rejected this request.   

It seems that what happened that evening was not an issue that could be solved by hanging a Greek flag.    

Unfortunately, the parties could not organize the “friendship concert” properly from the very beginning. 

Regrettably, our mainstream media, whose nationalist veins are ready to swell at any moment, did not refrain from producing hostility through the Greek artist’s behavior. They harmed friendship and peace with generalizing headlines that produced hate speech. 

In one sentence:

• I had written that the price of pomegranate juice was missing in the “1200 TL pomegranate juice shock for tourists” news in İHA, AHaber, Posta, Türkiye, TRT Haber, and Akşam, but unlike the others, it was stated in the İHA news that two glasses of pomegranate juice were 200 TL, I missed that.
  

• Journalist Bahar Feyzan published the footage taken while she was having a skincare procedure applied to her face and neck by a beauty company as an advertisement on Instagram.
• While Hürriyet said “Tatiana’s mistake was her end” and Sözcü said “Deadly mistake from Russian phenomenon,” Sabah, on the contrary, wrote “The one who hit Tatiana was found fully at fault,” stating that it was not Tatiana but her friend “Onur Obuk who was fully at fault according to the report.”
• DHA reported “He killed the woman he lived with through religious marriage in the middle of the street,” even though there is no concept of “religious marriage” in the laws.  
• Yeni Şafak did not provide information on whether Şakirpaşa Airport would be closed with the opening of this airport in its “Çukurova Airport opens on August 10” news.
• Kanal D repeated the footage of the man leaving the house and walking to the mosque six times in the “Arrow attacker” news; Show TV repeated the female thief crawling to the drawer four times.
• While DHA and Sözcü wrote that there was no explosive material in the unmanned sea vehicle found on the shores of Çatalca, İHA, Sputnik, and Yeni Şafak claimed that the vehicle was loaded with bombs.
• Akşam published an advertisement for a hotel in Akçakoca in the form of news with the headline “Experience peace in nature” without putting a “This is an advertisement” warning.
• In Hürriyet’s “Daytime consultant, nighttime DJ” news, the information that the “25 most successful Turkish graduates of this year in the USA” list mentioned was prepared by StudyinAmerica.com was missing.
• Yeni Akit linked the actions of dog lovers to an organization called the “Animal Liberation Front,” which does not exist in Turkey, without relying on any concrete data, with the news “The terrorist ‘ALF’ organization is behind the dog lobby.”

FOR YOUR CRITICISM, COMPLAINTS, AND SUGGESTIONS: [email protected]