The polarization of Kelebek and Günaydın over talent agents

When entertainment journalist Birsen Altuntaş wrote about five months ago that the Competition Authority had placed allegations of monopolization and manipulation in the acting industry on its agenda,  it only caught the attention of TV100 columnist Fuat Uğur.

 Uğur, who penned three articles on the subject, also claimed that a female talent agent had 'portrayed one of her female actresses as being in a relationship with a gay singer to swindle 5 million dollars from the singer's businessman lover.' It was problematic for Uğur to report such a serious accusation in the form of gossip, even without naming names, and without seeking a counter-opinion.

No one paid much attention to this claim until Altuntaş wrote on her website on January 7 that 'the Competition Authority has launched an investigation into 21 casting agencies and talent management companies for violating competition laws.' Those articles were remembered only after the Competition Authority's announcement of the investigation...

While posts from celebrities in the TV series industry were flying around on social media, rumors spread that the female agent Fuat Uğur did not name was Ayşe Barım, co-founder of ID İletişim, and that those living a 'publicity romance' were Serenay Sarıkaya and Mert Demir. 

Interestingly, just like the actors, there was a polarization in the tabloid media as well. The two most obvious examples of this polarization were Sabah's tabloid supplement Günaydın and Hürriyet's tabloid supplement Kelebek. From the very first day, the allegations were on the front page of Günaydın almost every day: 

'Investigation into the 'Empire of Fear' by the Competition Authority,' 'The order of fear has been exposed,' 'Let this bullying and mafia order end now,' 'The accusations are serious, the names in the crosshairs will testify,' 'Agents ruin the lives of those who do not pledge allegiance,' 'Panic of obscuring the truth / Travel ban for Ayşe Barım,' 'Some agents are like the mafia,' 'This is a system where the strong crush the weak.'

 Kelebek, on the other hand, remained silent for six days. So much so that they did not even report that the Competition Authority had launched an investigation. Days later, Ahmet Hakan briefly mentioned it in his column in Hürriyet; Orkun Ün and Savaş Özbey also wrote about it in their columns in Kelebek; that was all. 

With the prosecutor's office launching an investigation and imposing a travel ban on Ayşe Barım, Kelebek broke its silence and launched a defensive counter-attack. First, it headlined the statement from Serenay Sarıkaya and Mert Demir's lawyers, who claimed, 'We have not received any notification.' Mert Demir's words were also reported in Hürriyet on the same day. A day later, the defense continued with a story titled, 'An injustice is being done to Serenay.' It must have been well-received, as Mert Demir's words were repeated again the following day. The outlet also reported on Sarıkaya giving a statement to the prosecutor under the headline, 'The prosecutor asked about that allegation.'

In short, Günaydın and Kelebek have drifted to opposite extremes and taken sides. Günaydın publishes the accusations without providing space for the defense; it reports solely from the perspective of the prosecution. Kelebek, on the other hand, fails to inform its readers and, by publishing only the defense's side, acts as an advocate for the talent agents and their companies under investigation. Both are flawed from a journalistic standpoint.

HALK TV'S LACK OF ADVERTISING PRINCIPLES 

For months, Halk TV and its news website had been reporting against the construction project by the Sinpaş company, which is turning the Kızılbük bay in Marmaris into concrete. About a month ago, Gözde Şeker explained Halk TV's approach on the program 'Kırmızı Çizgi' as follows:

'As Halk TV, we are the followers of those bays being handed over and forests being opened up for mining. We are following it step by step. There are many examples where we have achieved results from this follow-up.' 

'Kızılbük in Marmaris is a corner of paradise. To use the most cliché expression. However, Kızılbük has become 'Betonbük' (Concrete-bük). There is a construction ban, there is sealing for those who do not comply, and there are fines. Yet, despite this, there are those who have the self-confidence and courage to continue construction. The court has canceled the permits.'

These words by Gözde Şeker are presented on Halk TV's YouTube account under the headline, 'Bombshell decision from the court! The permits of Sinpaş, which is plundering Marmaris Kızılbük, have been canceled.'   

Reports regarding this Sinpaş construction, titled 'Governor's permission now for the company close to the government! This is what they did to Marmaris!', 'Sinpaş has been plundering the bay in Marmaris for 18 years! Construction ban, sealing. This construction is exempt from all of them!', and 'Shock from the court to Sinpaş. Cancellation decision for the project drowning the paradise bay in concrete,' are still available on Halk TV's news website.

 However, after seeing a post on social media by Dr. Cem Baykal, I checked and saw that an advertisement for this Sinpaş construction project, promising 'delivery in April 2025, right by the sea,' was indeed live on the Halk TV website.

You report in your news and programs that this construction project harms the environment and that the court has revoked its permit; then you place its advertisement on your news site and contribute to the promotion and sale of that very project! To put it mildly, this is a contradictory and unprincipled stance. News and commentary cannot be evaluated independently of advertisements.

Moreover, publishing advertisements that contradict news and commentary means that the channel is willing to destroy the credibility of its reporting for the sake of making money. After all, which should Halk TV's readers and viewers believe? Its news and commentary, or the advertisements it publishes?  

RAW NEWS IN THE 'NARİN MURDER' CASE 

The court has delivered its verdict in the Narin Güran murder case, and the file is now in the appeals process. However, since it has not been clarified who committed the murder or why, the parties' efforts to clear their names continue. The post by Ali Eryılmaz, the lawyer for defendant Nevzat Bahtiyar, was one such effort: 

'It won't be long now; it seems either a confession is coming or they will start blaming each other. The first accusation has already arrived. Yüksel said, "Salim did it." Let's see, now it's Salim's turn to speak!'

It would be accurate to say that journalists jumped on this post by the lawyer. Numerous media outlets, including Artı Gerçek, Evrensel, Haberler, Habertürk, Hürriyet, Sputnik Türkiye, TGRT Haber, T24, Milliyet, Sözcü TV, and 24TV, reported the story using the word 'allegation' in their headlines. However, in Akşam, Sabah, Gazete Duvar, Gazete Pencere, Halk TV, and CNN Türk, the lawyer's words were presented as fact with headlines such as 'Accusations have begun,' 'Murder confession,' and 'First confession.'

Let me state clearly: this is not how news is written. News is constructed with verified information. Journalism is not a profession of relaying posts without checking them. Writing posts as 'allegations' does not absolve a journalist; not everything said can be immediately turned into a news report.

Before reporting on the lawyer's post, the questions 'Is the lawyer's claim true?' and 'Did the mother really confess?' should have been asked and answered. That is what true journalism is. 

It should not have been very difficult to call the authorities or the Güran family's lawyers to verify the words of Bahtiyar's lawyer. In fact, A Haber reporter Sinan Yılmaz had included in his report that he had spoken with the authorities and that the confession claim had not been verified.

Unfortunately, reports based solely on the lawyer's post do not provide information on whether the mother actually made such a confession. Therefore, these are not news reports, but raw, inadequate texts. There is no trace of journalism's ability to ask questions in these texts, nor of skepticism...

COMMUNICATION ERROR BY COMMUNICATORS 

Ramazan Çakmak, an analyst at Bersay Communication, where Yeni Şafak columnist Ali Saydam serves as Honorary President, sent an email to several media outlets on January 15:

 'Dear Journalist Friend, The news titled "Murder at the residence construction site in Maslak," which appeared in İHA today, has been removed by its source, İHA. On this occasion, we kindly request that you remove the news you have published on your page. Your support is valuable to us. Thank you very much...'

It is a complete disaster that such an email could be sent. A communications professional is not the superior of journalists; they cannot 'request' or demand the removal of a news story. If there is a logical reason, it should be stated, yet the message does not mention any such information or that the news was incorrect. 

Furthermore, if İHA has removed the news from publication, it informs its subscribers; there is no need for a communications professional to intervene. Moreover, DHA also reported the story, and the communications professional who sent the message seems unaware of this. For some reason, İHA removed it, but the DHA report remains published in many places...

The company behind the residence construction where the murder took place may be a client of Bersay Communications, but the name of the residence is not even mentioned in the news. Attempting to block a murder report for the sake of the reputation of a company whose name is not even written is an abuse of influence. A communication blunder by communications professionals...

In a single sentence:

While it was reported that the return fee was 25 kurus per box in the news titled "The deposit system was stillborn" in Turkey, the deposit amount was missing in Akşam's headline "Double gain in deposit." 

Sözcü engaged in discrimination by highlighting the suspect's gender in a murder in Balat, Istanbul, with the headline "Trans person killed a street vendor with a gun in Balat."

In Hürriyet and Yeni Şafak, a photo of a Serbian pensioner taken by Serbian photographer Dobo Kristian was used instead of a pensioner from Turkey.

Posta refuted Hürriyet's report, "The first Turk to reach the South Pole (A. R. Bilal)," with the news, "The first Turks to reach the zero point were two journalists (B. Özerdem/H. Kumuk)." 

Posta used a photo of Beşiktaş Mayor Rıza Akpolat from the first day and wrote, "He hasn't taken his cap off for 3 days," but Akpolat was not wearing a cap when leaving the courthouse.  

After President Erdoğan said, "...the truth is Esad, not Esed," Sabah corrected the name to "Esad" in the Anadolu Agency report titled "Luxury vehicles of the Esed family were imaged."

Türkgün, the publication organ of the MHP, wrote that "MHP leader Bahçeli has pardoned Kılıçdaroğlu," but a decision to "withdraw a complaint" does not equate to a "pardon."

Minister of Labor and Social Security Vedat Işıkhan, instead of explaining his work during a program on Habertürk TV, read a "news text prepared by the ministry's press team." 

The newspaper Yeni Yaşam insulted İYİ Party Chairman Musavat Dervişoğlu by writing, "Genocidal low-life draft of the İP." 

In Sabah's report titled "Terrible accident at the shopping mall," the name of the mall in Ankara's Çankaya district where the accident occurred was concealed.   

Yeni Şafak published a promotional text for the AKP-run Konya Metropolitan Municipality as a full-page spread, presented as if it were a news story, under the headline "Historical heritage meets the future in Konya." 

In Akşam's report titled "She gave a concert on the stage where she was a tree: She took her revenge 30 years later," information regarding the location of the stage where Karsu performed was missing.  

While human casualties were reported in the Los Angeles fires, information regarding animals and plants was omitted; those living beings were ignored in the news coverage.

The text published in Kelebek regarding an event for an Italian sunglasses brand, attended by Revna Demirören, the wife of the newspaper's owner Yıldırım Demirören, was a form of advertorial.

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