Media Ombudsman Faruk Bildirici reveals the backstory of the ROK crisis at Halk TV: Here is the conversation that severed the ties

The interview with Rasim Ozan Kütahyalı broadcast on Halk TV caused a major crisis within the channel. Media Ombudsman and 12punto columnist Faruk Bildirici detailed the events. The behind-the-scenes story of the process, which began after the interview and resulted in resignations, has come to light.

Halk TV's experienced figures Barış Pehlivan and Barış Terkoğlu were shocked when they first watched the interview with Rasim Ozan Kütahyalı. According to Faruk Bildirici, Pehlivan was greatly surprised when he saw the interview with Kütahyalı and immediately informed Terkoğlu. Following Pehlivan's warning, Terkoğlu sent the link to the interview to the channel's owner, Cafer Mahiroğlu.

MAHİROĞLU'S FIRST REACTION

Upon receiving this information from Terkoğlu, Mahiroğlu responded with surprise, saying the interview would be removed from the broadcast. However, after finishing the phone call and calling the channel manager, the video remained online. Mahiroğlu pulled his car over and gave instructions for the video to be removed, but the video remained online for 22 minutes following this instruction.

At that moment, realizing the video was still online, Pehlivan decided not to wait any longer and made a post criticizing the interview. This post was seen by Mahiroğlu shortly after, and the channel owner, angered, called the manager again and gave the instruction, "Do not remove it from the broadcast."

Here are the highlights from Faruk Bildirici's article:

That evening, when Barış Pehlivan saw the interview conducted with Rasim Ozan Kütahyalı, he was surprised and also saddened that such a name was broadcast under the Halk TV logo with exaggerated praise.

He immediately informed Barış Terkoğlu; he then sent the link of the interview to the channel's owner, Cafer Mahiroğlu, and then called him. Mahiroğlu stated that he had just learned about the interview and replied that he would "have it removed from the broadcast immediately." After hanging up the phone, Terkoğlu entered the live broadcast after relaying the response he received to Pehlivan.

At that time, Mahiroğlu, who was driving, pulled his vehicle over to a place and called the relevant manager from the channel, telling them to remove the video. But 22 minutes had passed; seeing that the interview had not been removed, Pehlivan thought there was no need to wait any longer and made a post criticizing the interview. A few minutes later, when Mahiroğlu saw Pehlivan's post, he got angry, called the channel again, and gave the instruction, "Do not remove it from the broadcast."

In the post that angered Mahiroğlu, Pehlivan pointed out that the reporter who conducted the interview did not know Kütahyalı, stating, "This is very sad. Kütahyalı is one of the media legs of the current rot in Turkey. Giving someone like this a 'wise' role in the Kurdish opening issue is a huge mistake." He concluded his criticism by saying, "Halk TV is a television channel that is the pride of these lands. This was an interview unworthy of this accumulation and effort."

Terkoğlu also retweeted Pehlivan's post after coming off the air; subsequently, Timur Soykan, Murat Ağırel, and Şule Aydın also gave their support; reactions to the interview increased rapidly.

Let me state immediately that conducting an interview with Kütahyalı is an editorial choice; it can be done. The issue, as Pehlivan emphasized, is how it is done. Presenting Kütahyalı as an expert on the Imralı process without ever mentioning his past in the media, and restoring his reputation with praise, was wrong.

Undoubtedly, every journalist has the right to object to a broadcast in the institution where they work. But the objection should first be voiced within the institution. It would have been more appropriate for Pehlivan to make an effort to have that interview removed before expressing his reaction externally.

What escalated the crisis was that the interview was not removed from the broadcast even the next morning, despite so much reaction. The first decision to leave came from Serpil Yılmaz, who said, "Halk TV has fallen far from the point I wanted to be at: with Rasim Ozan Kütahyalı."

From the morning hours, Mahiroğlu began pressuring to appear on the "Kayda Geçsin" program to respond to the criticisms. Şule Aydın and the team opposed this on the grounds that Halk TV would be harmed. They suggested that the editor-in-chief or the relevant editor should appear instead of Mahiroğlu. Mahiroğlu, who did not accept these suggestions, said that if he did not appear, the program would not happen either.

Thus, the ties reached the breaking point, but the team continued to wait to go on the program. They even kept their guests waiting. But Mahiroğlu escalated the tension to a higher level by giving a harsh response on social media in the evening hours.

Starting his words by saying, "A campaign was launched against me and the channel by a group of Halk TV programmers on social media," Mahiroğlu described the interview with Kütahyalı as a "traffic accident." Acting like an Editor-in-Chief, Mahiroğlu said, "I was not aware that the interview was conducted. If I had been, I would not have approved it"; he complained about Pehlivan for not calling him before the post. He complained that his request to use his "right of reply" was not accepted.

When there was no possibility of doing their program without Mahiroğlu participating, the "Kayda Geçsin" team and Terkoğlu decided to leave. Minutes after Şule Aydın announced, "Our paths with Halk TV have parted," Mahiroğlu connected to the news program. Ece Üner eased Mahiroğlu's situation by saying at the introduction, "I suppose it is a first in Turkish history; it is an interesting development for a person to want to participate in their own television station and use their right of reply, and to be rejected."

Like Ece Üner, Cafer Mahiroğlu also knows it wrong. The "right of reply" is the right of the addressee to state their opposing view in the same medium regarding a broadcast. However, there is no broadcast here; there are posts on social media. Mahiroğlu has already responded by making a post.

The real problem is that the addressee of the criticism regarding the broadcast is not the owner of the channel; it is the managers related to the broadcast. Due to "editorial independence," the channel owner cannot interfere with the broadcast. However, Mahiroğlu, with his post, insistence on participating in the program, and his speech on the news bulletin, announced that Halk TV's broadcasts were not independent of him; he violated editorial independence.

Mahiroğlu later had the interview removed from the broadcast, but it was too late. Kütahyalı had already put the entire interview on the site where he does his program. The title also reflected Kütahyalı's joy at what happened: "ROK collapsed Halk TV from the inside."

Link to Faruk Bildirici's article today: https://12punto.com.tr/yazarlar/faruk-bildirici/halk-tvdeki-krizin-arka-yuzu-77905