If official statements told the truth

Following the death of 10 of our people in the forest fire in Eskişehir, RTÜK President Ebubekir Şahin reiterated the familiar warning he gives after every disaster:

“…that one should only rely on statements and official information provided by authorized bodies and relevant institutions…”

The problem is that none of the statements made regarding the incident in Eskişehir explained who was responsible for the deaths of these young people, nor did they provide information on why their equipment was inadequate. The words of Minister of Agriculture and Forestry İbrahim Yumaklı went no further than saying, “...unfortunately they remained inside the fire” and “...I offer my condolences.”

There is another more recent and equally sad example on our agenda. On July 26, seven soldiers were hospitalized in İskenderun; two of them lost their lives. Hours after the news broke, the Ministry of National Defense explained the death of the two privates as “multiple organ failure caused by sodium levels in the blood due to extreme fluid loss.” What had happened that seven privates were suddenly hospitalized with the same complaint, and two of them died? This information was missing from the statement. The Ministry of National Defense’s weekly regular press briefing also provided no information beyond “The investigation is ongoing.”

The pro-government media, as expected, only published the statement. Yeni Şafak published the news under the headline, “2 Mehmetçik martyred during training.” The opposition media, however, was not satisfied with the statement. While Cumhuriyet published it on its front page with the headline, “Training in the sun brought death,” Birgün, Evrensel, Gazete Pencere, Nefes, and Sözcü also published reactions stating that “soldiers were forced to train in 45-50 degree heat, causing them to die of thirst.”

The situation was the same in the funeral news a day later. While the opposition media continued to question the event with headlines like “There should be no training in the heat,” the pro-government media continued to report based solely on the ministry’s statement without questioning the cause of the incident.

While Akşam said, “Farewell to training martyrs with tears,” Hürriyet published a photo of a young girl holding an umbrella over the soldiers at the ceremony in Bulancak as “A meaningful image while bidding farewell to the martyr.” Yes, it was indeed meaningful, but in my opinion, it was actually a protest; the relative of the martyr was making a reference to the soldiers being forced to train under the sun.

For a long time now, “official statements and briefings” in this country have not been telling the truth, nor have they provided information about what the reality is. When one relies on those official statements, deaths are brushed aside as “training martyrs” or “forest martyrs” without being questioned, and even protests are softened before being published.

The ones who should be warned are not the questioning journalists, but the state officials who make statements that provide no information.

MEHMET TEZKAN IS WRONG, JOURNALISM IS LACKING

Is Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan right, or is CHP Chairman Özgür Özel? Should Fidan apologize, or should Özel?

Mehmet Tezkan was one of those who argued that Fidan was right in the debate regarding Turkey not signing the action plan against Israel at the conference held in Bogota. On the program on Halk TV, he said, “What Hakan Fidan says is correct here. He signed the declaration by adding a reservation. They didn't sign it there precisely to prepare the legal part of this reservation.”

Let me remind you, in the first statement made by the Foreign Ministry on July 16 after the conference, it was only stated that “views were shared,” and that was all. The first reaction to the non-signing of the declaration came from CHP Deputy Chairman and retired ambassador Namık Tan. He shared posts stating that the Foreign Ministry had taken an “ambiguous stance against the declaration” and that “they went to Bogota unprepared.”

Then, when Özgür Özel criticized them in Trabzon on July 19, saying, “They fled Colombia without signing the action plan at the meeting in Colombia. They were afraid of Trump,” it was already July 19.

In the Foreign Ministry’s statement responding to these reactions on the same day, there was talk of “completing the necessary preparations,” but there was no mention of a “dissenting opinion.” The Foreign Ministry statement the next day also claimed that “Turkey is one of the strongest defenders of the Palestinian cause,” but again, there was no mention that “the declaration would be signed with a reservation!”

The “dissenting opinion” only came to the agenda six days after Özel’s criticism in Trabzon, during Hakan Fidan’s interview on NTV on July 25. Fidan said, “Turkey is not a party to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. If we had signed it without coming to the center and conducting consultations, we would have put ourselves at a disadvantage. That text came, we talked, we looked at it. We placed a reservation.” Of course, I do not expect Burcu Kaya and Ahmet Arpad, who were sitting across from Fidan, to ask, “Did the issue of the reservation come to the agenda only after Özel’s reaction?” At the very least, they could have highlighted this new information by asking, “Did you sign it by placing a reservation?” but they didn't do that either.

It only became clear that the declaration was signed with a reservation after the Foreign Ministry’s statement on July 29, which stated that the “Bogota Declaration” was signed with the clarification that it was “not bound by the references made to the Law of the Sea Convention”; that is how it was reported in the media.

When Tezkan made his assessment that “Fidan is right,” the calendar showed July 30. Apparently, Tezkan had not followed the process closely; he had not paid attention to the dates. He was only making an assessment by looking at Fidan’s words and the ministry’s presentation as if “signing the Bogota Declaration with a dissenting opinion had been planned from the beginning.” Moreover, the VTR prepared for the program regarding the Özel-Fidan debate was also incomplete and biased.

The Foreign Ministry should have been aware of the declaration there before the conference and should have made preparations. But somehow, they did not go to Bogota with the decision to “sign with a dissenting opinion.” It is understood that the decision to sign by adding a “dissenting opinion” was made afterward, upon the reactions of Namık Tan and Özgür Özel. The proof is the process I recounted above…

Furthermore—as Murat Yetkin also emphasized—Turkey had already been signing all international texts for years by adding dissenting opinions to the articles related to the law of the sea convention...

IS KORKMAZ KARACA AN OPINION LEADER?

Odatv’s news titled “Korkmaz Karaca breaks the mold: US Ambassador is a descendant of the Ottomans” and Ekoltv’s “Remarkable analysis from Korkmaz Karaca: US Ambassador is a descendant of the Ottomans” reported on Karaca’s article containing his views on US Ambassador Tom Barrack.

However, there was no information in the news about who this person, who is presented as an opinion leader and given so much importance, actually is. I would understand if he were a well-known politician, artist, or writer, but he is not.

Indeed, in the news on İnternethaber, which reported on that article by Korkmaz Karaca as “Remarkable Tom Barrack analysis from Korkmaz Karaca,” the information was provided that “Korkmaz Karaca, who also served as a member of the Presidential Economic Policies Board for a period.” This information in İnternethaber also did not explain why Karaca’s opinion on the US Ambassador was newsworthy.

Let me remind you; “Crime organization leader” Sedat Peker had alleged that Karaca “used a vehicle allocated by businessperson Sezgin Baran Korkmaz, who is being tried in the US on charges of money laundering, and frequently went to his mansion.” When Peker later alleged that he had requested a bribe from an investor, Karaca resigned from his duties in the Presidency and the AKP in 2021.

If a media organization is reporting on the views of such a person, it should provide information about that person to its readers. Otherwise, the fundamental element of the news is missing, and the news value becomes questionable. Since he is not providing any new, unknown information and is not expressing extraordinary views…

JOURNALISTS’ SENSITIVITY TO GIFT VOUCHERS

Nurettin Akçul, Chairman of the Turkey Mining Workers’ Union, organized a “Thank you and solidarity dinner” for journalists. Upon leaving, 3,000 lira shopping vouchers were gifted to the journalists.

The part of this event that made me happy is that a portion of the journalist friends there did not accept the shopping vouchers and returned them immediately. Of course, there were not a few who accepted them.

After the “press meeting” of Settar Aslan, Chairman of the Öz-Orman İş Union affiliated with Hak-İş, 5,000 lira gift vouchers from a technology company were also given to journalists. Most of the journalists who came there to learn the union’s views on forest fires and the lack of equipment for forest workers returned the gift vouchers.

Settar Aslan had also gifted smartwatches to journalists who followed his breakfast press conference three years ago, and I had criticized it then as well. It seems no lesson has been learned. If unionists focused on union actions instead of trying to bribe journalists, their more striking news would be published.

A journalist can receive symbolic gifts from a news source, but they cannot develop a financial relationship by receiving such valuable gifts. A conflict of interest arises with the gift-giver. It is truly gratifying that young journalists who are aware of ethical issues acted sensitively by rejecting the gift vouchers…

But it is sad that they did not show reaction to the obstruction of the ANKA team, who were following the public collective bargaining signing ceremony, by ministry officials, and did not show solidarity with their colleagues.

THEY ANGERED MÜFİT CAN SAÇINTI

In Sözcü’s news titled “Those close to the government will give talks for 20 million,” it is stated that the AKP-run Konya Metropolitan Municipality held a tender for six talks; the names and photos of the journalists, politicians, and artists who would participate in these talks were also included.

Actor Müfit Can Saçıntı denied the claim with a video; he was angry both at being involved in such an event and at being mentioned as a name “close to the government.” Other denials also came from those whose names were mentioned. The Konya Municipality also announced that “this amount covers the organizations to be held with 325 artists and cultural figures in eight programs to be organized throughout the year.”

Despite all these objections and statements, Sözcü reported the next day, “Those whose names were in the municipality’s contract said they were not consulted and were unaware that their names were put on such a list.” They wrote it as if the municipality had also confirmed it.

However, verification should have been done before the first news was published. It was wrong to include their names and photos without checking, as if they had also agreed to do paid programs for the municipality. Furthermore, the difference between the municipality’s statement and the first news could have been conveyed more clearly.

In one sentence:

-Milliyet used the news that DHA and İHA reported on July 23, “Devlet Bahçeli’s ‘Unifying Crescent’ model has been turned into a book,” on July 29, and Sabah on August 1.

-Cumhuriyet, in its “Surprise summit” news, wrote that Foreign Minister Fidan “received” National Defense Minister Güler and MIT Undersecretary Kalın, placing Fidan in a different position in the protocol.

-Karar introduced a hotel in Cappadocia with a half-page text with the headline “Lavender-scented experience” and praise ending with “must be seen,” engaging in advertorials.

-The headline of the news in Gerçek Gündem said, “Another fire news from Ankara,” but the news stated that a forest fire broke out in the Yapraklı district of Çankırı.

-Halk TV, NTV, and Now TV did not name the private hospital in Ankara where the ministry opened an investigation and filed a criminal complaint in the news of “Doctorless birth scandal at the hospital.”

-In the news of “Valet totaled the luxury vehicle,” which was published in many places in the media, it was unclear at which hotel in İzmir this incident occurred.

-Cumhuriyet increased its price from 20 TL to 25 TL, and Sözcü from 15 TL to 25 TL.

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