The limits of bosses and the freedom of journalists

First, Cem Küçük wrote about me, calling me a "mind from the 2nd century BC." A few days later, Şaban Sevinç wrote in a social media post that I was a "romantic," adding that people like me were "talking nonsense."

What brought them both to a common denominator were the developments at Halk TV. Cem Küçük talks about the freedom of bosses to pay anyone whatever salary they wish, and he opposes union organization. Then he brought the subject to me, saying, "Minds from the 2nd century BC like Faruk Bildirici are also against sponsors. How will a journalist earn money without sponsors or advertising?"

Şaban Sevinç also opposed the concept of "editorial independence," stating, "It is not shameful to be a channel boss. And the boss can certainly set the editorial boundaries." He also defended the "blacklist" practice at Halk TV, which includes names who have been barred from appearing on screen, alongside channel owner Cafer Mahiroğlu.

The fundamental mistake is that Cem Küçük reduces the departure of Seda Selek, Sorel Dağıstanlı, Remziye Demirkol, Gözde Şeker, Buket Güler, and Gökmen Karadağ from Halk TV to a "salary dispute," and Şaban Sevinç frames it as a matter of "personal rights."

Yes, there is clearly a problem of "salary imbalance," but the real reason for their objections is "devaluation" and Cafer Mahiroğlu's interventions in the editorial process. Editorial independence is the limit for bosses; when they cross that line, the freedom of journalists is threatened; the boss's interests take precedence over journalistic principles and rules.

We have known for years that the mechanism works this way in the mainstream media. But are we going to accept and legitimize this wrong, or are we going to oppose it and fight? Especially, shouldn't we object to the management of a channel like Halk TV, which is a defender of press freedom, democracy, and justice, becoming like the others?

The fact that Aydın Doğan and other bosses have rendered unions ineffective and made journalists unable to defend their own rights is also clear. The issue is not that "star journalists" receive high salaries. The real issue is that the vast majority of journalists in the opposition media are also working for salaries close to the minimum wage. This cannot be dismissed by saying it is the "bosses' right."

Let's come to the subject of sponsorship and advertising. As Cem Küçük said, I am not against journalists receiving advertising, but against them doing advertising and acting in commercials. It is wrong for journalists to use their credibility for the sale of a commercial product; it harms journalism. Moreover, this is not just my opinion, but a professional principle accepted by professional organizations... It is understandable, of course, that Cem Küçük, who can reconcile founding and being a partner in a shoe company with journalism, is far from this principle...

I am not entirely against receiving sponsorship. Cem Küçük may have forgotten; he had criticized some journalists broadcasting on YouTube for entering into sponsorship relationships with companies facing accusations. In my article titled "The ICRYPEX case and the harm of sponsorships to journalists," I expressed the view that "Journalists should avoid sponsorship relationships as much as possible, and if they do enter into them, they should research that company very well and be very careful to protect editorial independence." I pointed out that otherwise, it could cast a shadow over reporting, as in the ICRYPEX incident.

Let me give a current example. Journalist Kazım Kızıl shared on social media that "the sponsor of the environment and ecology program 'Açık Yeşil' on Apaçık Radyo is the Fiba Renewable Energy company." He writes, "Ecology journalism is not a field for companies to whitewash themselves with green paint." This is a very valid criticism.

Some may want bosses and especially "media owners" to be free and use journalists as they wish. I will continue to defend the principles of independent and critical journalism and fight for this cause. Even if the times have changed, the necessity for journalism to stay away from all conflict-of-interest relationships has not disappeared.