Polarization within the CHP and attacks on journalists

In the new order brought to the media by the 25-year AKP rule, journalists have largely forgotten how to ask questions that challenge, interrogate, or sometimes corner politicians. It is not just members of the ruling party who have grown fond of this situation; officials from opposition parties have as well.

That is why they are surprised, and sometimes even react, when they encounter a journalist who does not offer hospitality and asks questions without flattery. Yıldız Yazıcıoğlu from Gazete Pencere is a journalist who has previously faced reactions from many politicians, most notably President Erdoğan and MHP Chairman Bahçeli, due to her probing questions.

Now, while asking straightforward questions to CHP Spokesperson Müslim Sarı without "pretending," she was subjected to an ugly incident; a party member heckled her, saying, "You are taking a yellow envelope, of course you would ask such a question."

Yıldız Yazıcıoğlu and the other journalists present reacted immediately. Müslim Sarı also stated that this person, named Hüseyin Doğan, was not his advisor and only "helped him from time to time," adding that he did not approve of his behavior.

However, there was no announcement that Hüseyin Doğan, who is the administrator of the WhatsApp group established for journalists, had been removed from the party. It is already clear that the CHP Headquarters takes a stance against those outside the pro-government media. The slander that money is being paid to opposition media and journalists has been put forward for some time by certain names from the party and the Yeni Akit newspaper. Even if the journalists who are being smeared file lawsuits, no behavior is displayed to take these rumors out of circulation.

Unfortunately, the polarization within the CHP is also leading to physical interventions against journalists. The Halk TV team was interfered with twice in the Headquarters garden. Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu supporters attacked Sözcü TV reporters during the chaos in front of the Turkish Grand National Assembly. Özgür Özel supporters also physically intervened against TGRT Haber and Akit TV reporters.

These are wrong behaviors that hold journalists responsible for the editorial line of the media organizations they work for. Both CHP leaders and the party management must make an effort to stop this violence against press and freedom of expression and warn their supporters.

Unfortunately, in this tense process, there are those who abandon the calm and detached language of journalism and speak, write, and share posts using insulting words; there are also those who abandon their journalist identity and act like politicians.

For example, Şaban Sevinç speaks on screens as a journalist, but at the same time, he supports Özgür Özel with his politician identity. Şaban Sevinç, who was also a parliamentary candidate from the CHP in the past, participated in a march held by a group of party members in Samsun immediately after the "absolute nullity" decision was announced; he gave a speech to party members from a podium draped with a CHP flag; he described Kılıçdaroğlu and his team as "apparatuses within the CHP." Undoubtedly, it is his right to act like a politician, but then he should not be presented on screens as a journalist.

I had previously written and criticized that the politician identity of Barış Yarkadaş, who was previously in the ranks of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, was overshadowing his journalism. We must not confuse these colleagues of ours who take sides as politicians with independent journalists who try to inform the public with an objective language by standing at a distance from this fragmentation.

Turning a student protest into a terrorist act

The Sabah newspaper brought the events that took place among students at Istanbul High School (İstanbul Erkek Lisesi) to the agenda on December 6, 2025, with the headline "Peer beating for champions."

Two days later, the Türkiye newspaper wrote in its headline "Harassment scandal at Istanbul High School: Scandal at the elite school" that behind the "beating" allegation, "a harassment list and intimate images targeting female students had emerged."

However, while announcing that the investigation was completed on December 27, Sabah refuted the Türkiye newspaper by providing information that "the harassment allegation was not confirmed," "there were no images belonging to female students," and that it was "a case of organized and systematic violence within the upper-lower class relationship."

The Türkiye newspaper, which did not respond to Sabah at the time, published the students' protest against the school principal by turning their backs and singing the national anthem at the Istanbul High School graduation ceremony as "The last gasp of illegal organized structures: The provocation at Istanbul High School did not work." A sentence in the news also referred to the events in December:

"It has been determined that the disciplinary incidents that occurred within the school grounds in the first semester were not simple youth mistakes, but planned activities of organized and terror-linked structures fed from the outside."

However, there was neither an investigation, nor a detention, nor an official statement regarding the existence of such a "terror-linked structure." There was no new evidence, information, or source in the news. In the news, which consisted entirely of sentences ending with "it was reported," "it was stated," and "it was determined," it remained unknown who determined, who stated, who reported, or who reacted.

It seems that the Türkiye newspaper was offended by Sabah's refutation that "Sabah wrote the truth for the first time" and is trying to maintain its claim to journalism with the news "The provocation at Istanbul High School did not work." But a journalistic deficit cannot be covered up by presenting the democratic protest of students as the activity of a terrorist organization.

RTÜK's unauthorized interventions

RTÜK surprised everyone last week by fining pro-government channels ATV, Show TV, Star TV, and Kanal D, in addition to opposition channels Halk TV, Sözcü TV, and Now TV. Even if it is an administrative fine, it is an innovation for RTÜK.

However, RTÜK continues to enter areas that are not its duty or authority.

RTÜK does not have the authority to intervene in a politician's speech or block their broadcast. Despite this, RTÜK went beyond its jurisdiction by fining Sözcü TV on the grounds that it broadcast Özgür Özel's words directed at Minister of Justice Akın Gürlek; it interfered with press and freedom of expression.

RTÜK Chairman Mehmet Daniş also went beyond his scope of duty and authority by reacting to a woman calling her dog "My son" in a rechargeable vacuum cleaner advertisement broadcast before Mother's Day.

He expressed the view that "this approach neither correctly represents the love for animals nor gives the concept of motherhood the value it deserves," and announced that they "would not allow the erosion of values on screens" and that they "had launched an investigation into the relevant commercial film."

In fact, RTÜK did not have the authority to audit advertisements; it was out of the question for the Chairman of the Supreme Board to launch an investigation regarding a commercial broadcast. The Advertising Board, which is affiliated with the Ministry of Trade and where RTÜK is also represented by one member, is authorized in these matters.

Therefore, I watched with curiosity how Mehmet Daniş would carry out those words. Although about 2.5 months have passed, no decision has come out of RTÜK regarding that advertisement, and it could not have come out anyway.

Now Mehmet Daniş is obliged to make a public statement regarding those words. I hope he has also understood that he should not make statements that bind the Supreme Board before a decision is made.

The contribution of awards to reputation

Ali Saydam's company has received 93 bulletins regarding awards given to companies in the last month. In his article in Yeni Şafak, he listed these awards one by one and added:

"Which one of these will anyone keep in mind? Let alone adding value to reputation, they can even damage it. You be careful, pay special attention to the issue of awards and their communication."

This warning from Ali Saydam also applies to journalism awards. The number of awards given to journalists and media organizations is also too high. Dozens, perhaps more, awards are distributed every year. Organizations other than journalism organizations, and even some companies, give awards to journalists!

Unfortunately, most of these awards do not contribute to the reputation of the journalists and media organizations receiving them. I hope one day we can succeed in rejecting awards that do not add value.

Names of those who died in traffic accidents

Türkiye newspaper columnist Ömer Ekinci witnessed closely what people who lost four relatives in a traffic accident in Trabzon went through. While their relatives were still worrying about "How are we going to tell them about the accident now," the accident footage and the names of the deceased were published in the media.

Ömer Ekinci, who shared in people's pain, was very saddened. He wrote an article titled "Limits on accident footage" and opposed the reckless publication of the names of the deceased and accident footage in traffic accident news. He suggested that "limitations" be brought to accident news:

The publication of identity information in accidents should be prohibited,

The publication of child identities should be included in the absolute prohibition scope,

Limitations should be placed on the instant publication of accident footage on social media,

The content removal mechanism should be facilitated,

A 'Tragedy Journalism Ethics Guide' should be made mandatory for media organizations,

Accident news should be considered a priority category in the application of the right to be forgotten.

Actually, there is no need for a ban as Ekinci suggested; if ethical principles are followed, there would be no problem. It is a universal principle in journalism that the names of those who die or are injured in a traffic accident should not be published before their relatives learn about it. Respect for people's pain requires that they learn about the death or injury of their relatives privately and through appropriate methods.

As in every event, care should be taken that accident footage does not reflect death and horror and does not contain bloody scenes. However, the content removal mechanism is already very easy in our country. Peace judges remove dozens of news items from publication instantly with a petition.

There is no regulation in our law yet regarding the "right to be forgotten," but media organizations should already remove news that spreads people's traumas over the years from publication upon application.

It is very valuable that Ömer Ekinci is concerned about the trauma that traffic accident news creates in people. We journalists should also take sharing in the pain of those people as a basis in accident news.

In one sentence:

Cumhuriyet misreported former Constitutional Court President Haşim Kılıç's assessment of the nullity decision in the CHP as "It is much heavier than the closure decision" by announcing it as "It would have been better if it had been closed," and Sözcü TV as "I wish it had been closed."

A firm's "digital transformation cooperation" promotion with a Korean car brand was published in Hürriyet and Sabah with the label "This is an advertisement," and in Yeni Şafak without any warning as if it were news.

Yeni Şafak published a full-page promotion of the AKP-run Ümraniye Municipality as news without putting an advertisement warning.

Yeni Akit supported violence by publishing the armed attacks that started on Koç Holding companies after the joke told by Rahmi Koç with the headline "Anger at disrespectful Koç does not subside."

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