The execution squad in the hotel room

The police acted like an execution squad. When they knocked on the door of the hotel room where Uşak Mayor Özkan Yalım was staying, it was clear they knew there was a woman with him. They filmed Yalım, who opened the door wrapped in a towel, and then the young woman in the room at great length.

Then the execution began; those images were put into circulation a few hours later through journalists from the pro-government media. The images were published alongside information claiming that Yalım had two lovers and that the lover in the hotel room was also a municipal employee. There was not even any focus on how the images, which should have been confidential and taken by the police, were leaked or by whom.

The execution continued with a statement from the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, which was conducting the investigation. Allegations of bribery and corruption were presented to the public along with lists of assets. As in other operations targeting CHP-run municipalities, we saw journalism that acted as judge and jury here as well.

However, we cannot view what happened at the hotel simply as a "violation of privacy." Özkan Yalım is a politician and a public official. Moreover, if the 21-year-old woman he was in a relationship with is a municipal employee, it means Yalım's use of his mayoral position and abuse of influence are at stake. This is not a crime, but it is an ethical issue. The opposition media did not dwell on it much, but this aspect also carries news value.

However, the person whose privacy was truly violated in this operation is that young woman in the hotel room. She was branded without being questioned or even given a chance to speak. Not only were the images of her in the room published in outlets like Sabah, A Haber, and TGRT, but her photos with her face visible were also used in Yeni Akit, Haberler.com, and some local websites; the young woman was openly exposed. As the target of a ruthlessly conducted political operation, her personality was shattered by the hands of "journalism"...

Also mention that he is a jeweler

İslam Memiş is the rising star of economic commentary. His analyses regarding the economy and the market are constantly published on screens, news sites, and in newspapers.

His comments are held in high regard in almost all media organizations, from Haber Global to Yeni Şafak, from Ulusal Kanal to TV 100, A Haber, Sözcü TV, and Cumhuriyet. For the last two months, in addition to all this, he has also started writing columns for the Hürriyet newspaper.

He also has many titles. On some screens, "financial analyst" or "finance expert" is written under his portrait, while in others, he is called a "gold and money markets expert," "economy writer," or "economist."

Yet, İslam Memiş is a graduate of the Business Administration department at Atatürk University. Afterward, he worked in the finance departments of Günaydın and Akşam newspapers and his family company. Then, he served as an economy editor at Anadolu Agency for 4 years. He became famous in the financial market and media through his videos on YouTube and his comments on social media and news channels.

This is his career story. However, he is also a jeweler; he has a jewelry company registered in his own name in the Trade Registry Gazette. He often meets with journalists at his store. During broadcasts, a gold counter is visible in the background. Most recently, his analyses regarding the economic effects of the war that began with the US and Israel's attack on Iran were published in newspapers and on television.

Memiş's competence in finance, markets, and economics, and whether his analyses are successful, is a matter for experts to evaluate. In fact, in recent days, as gold prices fell and a rush to gold began, the "expertise" of many experts has become a subject of debate. A news story even appeared on the internet titled, "Gold has started to fall, the economists who hyped the market have disappeared."

Although Memiş wrote that he did not see a need to "update his predictions," the aspect that interests me as a journalist is not his predictions. It is the fact that the reader and viewer are not informed that this person, who makes comments about the gold markets, is also a "jeweler."

Yet this is very important. Because he is a player in the very "gold market" where he makes analyses and directs people; he makes money from buying and selling gold. It is a clear case of a "conflict of interest." Even if he does not mix his comments with his business, such a conflict is obvious.

İslam Memiş does not hide the "conflict of interest"; media and TV executives also know about this situation.

Despite this, they see no harm in publishing his analyses. If they would just write that he is a "jeweler" while introducing him with various titles on screens and in columns, people would be fully informed...

Akın Gürlek's fait accompli

It was an important change that Minister of Justice Akın Gürlek invited ANKA, Nefes, NOW TV, and Sözcü reporters to celebrate the holiday with judicial correspondents.

For the opposition media, which are not admitted to the Presidency, ministries, and public institutions, this meant a slight easing of the restrictions in their working area and being treated as interlocutors. However, not all of the opposition media were invited.

The holiday celebration, which coincided with the day after the arrest of BirGün's İsmail Arı on charges of "publicly disseminating information that misleads the public" (!), was turned into a complete fait accompli; reporters were not allowed to ask questions. Gürlek arrived, met the journalists, had a group photo taken, and left. These things happened in a few minutes. That is why they could not push the conditions to find an opportunity to ask questions.

But the group photo was published on the ministry's website, and the reporters were used as accessories in a public relations activity. The ministry's statement consisted of only four sentences ending with verbs like "Minister Gürlek... celebrated the holiday with judicial correspondents... congratulated them on their holiday... chatted for a while... had a group photo taken."

In fact, the reporters were not even given the opportunity to chat with Gürlek; the statement did not accurately reflect what happened. The news about the holiday celebration could have reflected the fait accompli there, but instead, the ministry's statement was repeated exactly as is. Still, I understand the situation of the reporters in the opposition media; they are constantly under the pressure of not being invited again.

I hope they will be better prepared in their next encounter with Minister Gürlek. However, objecting to opposition journalists going to that invitation is also a wrong attitude. Of course, they will go, they will talk, they will write. They did the right thing by going to the ministry;

Indeed, Barış Terkoğlu's method of contacting the Ministry of Justice and asking about the allegations regarding assets was the correct approach. It is necessary to reflect allegations by checking them and getting the opposing view, no matter who they come from. The essential thing is not to report the allegation, but to inform the public accurately and completely. Indeed, Barış Terkoğlu was also explaining his meeting in that program by saying, "I talked to both sides. I will tell both the CHP's side and the Ministry of Justice's side."

Unfortunately, political polarization also affects journalism. Some government opponents do not want to see the government's views in the opposition media; they cannot tolerate critical treatment of the opposition either. That is why, in recent days, in addition to Barış Terkoğlu, Barış Pehlivan, İsmail Saymaz, and Nevşin Mengü have also been targets of a lynching campaign.

Yet, these attacks are equivalent to wanting the opposition media to be like the pro-government media. Most of the pro-government media published Gürlek's response instead of Özgür Özel's allegations. Publishing only Özel's words without any scrutiny would have been like the pro-government media.

One should not confuse journalism with propaganda. A journalist approaches everyone critically; goes everywhere, talks to everyone. What matters is how they speak and what they produce.

Hospital advertisement, not health

Milliyet's Sunday supplement has a health page; interviews with doctors are published on this page. It caught my attention with a reader's warning; the people interviewed are always doctors from the same hospital.

I scanned these supplements of Milliyet, and in the 12 weeks since the beginning of the year, interviews with 12 doctors from a private hospital named "M..." have been published. Only once were interviews with two doctors from another hospital used on the page.

Let's set aside the whole of Turkey; is there only that one private hospital in Istanbul? There can be no justification from a journalistic perspective for ignoring all public and university hospitals in Istanbul, other private hospitals, and the expert doctors there.

Similarly, the Yeni Şafak newspaper also has a "Health" page published once a week; health topics related to eyes are constantly covered there; moreover, doctors from the same private eye hospital are always the ones speaking. There is no "This is an advertisement" or "Sponsored content" warning on the edge of the page.

However, these publications by Milliyet and Yeni Şafak serve as advertisements for those private hospitals instead of informing readers. If the primary concern were people's health, they would find the best expert physicians in every field from public and private hospitals and talk to them. The insistence on publishing about the same hospitals, and the same private hospitals at that, shows that the real purpose is different.

Unfortunately, private hospitals do not recognize any limits in advertisements that look like news and health information. The media also sees no harm in acting as an intermediary for these advertising/promotional methods of private hospitals that do not comply with legal and ethical limitations.

Moreover, they deceive people by presenting this as news and information broadcasting. They ignore professional journalistic ethics; by not talking to competent physicians, they also endanger human health.

In a single sentence:

Milliyet reported the attack on a tanker carrying Russian oil near the Bosphorus with the headline "Explosion on oil-laden tanker," as if the explosion had occurred spontaneously.

Hürriyet coded the name of the person against whom Müjde Ar filed a lawsuit for insulting her as İrfan K. in its news story titled "40 thousand lira 'reputation' lawsuit."

Although its contagious effect is known, the suicide images of producer Erol Köse and influencer Kübra Karaarslan were dramatized and published on TV and news sites.

The pro-government media did not include the increase in the "broadly defined unemployment rate" while reporting on TÜİK's data showing a decrease in the unemployment rate.

Akşam published promotions for the AKP-run Ordu and Sincan municipalities, Yeni Akit for the Düzce Municipality, and Yeni Şafak for the K.Maraş and Karatay municipalities without adding an "advertisement" warning.

The Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor's Office ignored the "right to the presumption of innocence" of 16 people, including celebrities, with its statement regarding a drug operation targeting them.

Sabah, TGRT, and Odatv used the phrase "girl fight" in their news about the murder in Esenler, Istanbul, not only failing to fully explain the reason for the murder but also objectifying the woman.

TV100 published the news about the TBMM Report on "Peer bullying" accompanied by images of bullying, without considering that it could set an example for children.

Fuat Uğur's revelation in his program on TGRT that the message he received on his phone about the singer Ediz was accidentally sent by Cenk Eren proved once again the wrongness of reading such messages on live broadcasts without checking them.

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