The Imralı photo is wrong, that is Yassıada

I had noticed the use of an incorrect photograph in news reports regarding the visit of members of parliament to Abdullah Öcalan on some websites and in the Türkiye newspaper, but I did not dwell on it much.

I had settled for writing in the “In a single sentence” section of my article: “The photograph featured in the Türkiye newspaper’s ‘Here is the Imralı program’ report, which was also used by some news sites, is not of Imralı island, but of Yassıada, and even an old version of it at that.” I was mistaken to think that this warning would suffice.

In many of the reports regarding the visit of AKP’s Hüseyin Yayman, MHP’s Feti Yıldız, and DEM’s Gülistan Koçyiğit to Imralı island to meet with Abdullah Öcalan, the wrong photograph was used again. I even doubted myself and checked once more. I scanned the internet, starting from Google Earth and the “Democracy and Liberties Island” webpage. Yes, the lush green, tiny island photograph featured in the “Imralı visit” reports is not Imralı, but Yassıada.

It seems that, like most of my journalist colleagues, the editors of the Türkiye newspaper did not notice the warning sentence in my article; they mistakenly used the Yassıada photo instead of Imralı again in their front-page report titled “The delegation visited Imralı.”

Of course, my colleagues may not have had the time to read me, but they are obligated to check every element of a news report one by one before publishing it. Moreover, they should have paid attention to the photograph they used in the report about the visit to Öcalan, which is a first in the history of the Republic.

A photograph is the face of a news report, its storefront. A journalist who does not take care of the face of the report is not paying the necessary attention to the other elements of the report either.

THOSE WHO PUBLISHED THE WRONG PHOTOGRAPH

Unfortunately, in recent years, it has become a habit in our media to copy news from one another and steal photographs. When copying, they often do not ask the question, “Is this correct?” but take it and paste it into their own sites exactly as it is, with all its errors and shortcomings.

I think that is why the Yassıada photo, used instead of Imralı somewhere—wherever it was first published—has spread to dozens of sites, newspapers, and television channels in the “Öcalan visit” reports.

There is so much carelessness involved that it is not even a current photograph of Yassıada. It is that photograph of Yassıada from before it was overwhelmed by concrete buildings and named “Democracy and Liberties Island.” This photograph has likely been used incorrectly for a long time; because when I look back, I have always seen this same photo in old reports related to Imralı or Öcalan.

There are so many that I could only compile a portion of the newspapers, television channels, and news sites that used the Yassıada photo instead of the actual Imralı island:

Akşam, A Haber, Amed TV, CNN Türk, Cumhuriyet, Ekonomim, Ensonhaber, NOW TV, Halk TV, İnternethaber, Türkiye, Gazete Pencere, Serbestiyet, Sözcü, Takvim, Patronlar Dünyası, Rudaw, Milliyet, Milli Gazete, Odatv, Yeni Akit.

Actually, the number is much higher, but I did not include local sites in this list; nor could I scan all the television channels. Also, there may be some that I missed.

I know it is very difficult to correct a mistake in the media, but I hope my colleagues will take this warning into account and remove the incorrect photograph from their publications.

In any case, the headlines of these reports are far from reflecting the event accurately; “Imralı visit” is written repeatedly as if the deputies visited the island and returned. However, the essence of what happened is “visiting Öcalan” and “meeting with Öcalan.”

By writing “Imralı visit,” the answer to the question “Where” in the reports replaces the answer to the question “Who”; the subject and the setting are confused with each other.

At least let it be corrected so that these reports do not have the wrong photograph, if nothing else…