News anchor Nur Köşker responds to those remarks by Mehmet Akif Ersoy

Journalist Mehmet Akif Ersoy, in an additional statement given after his arrest in a drug investigation conducted in Istanbul, denied the allegations made by former Habertürk anchor Nur Köşker, stating, "Nur Köşker was fired from the channel for acting absurdly. That is why she harbors hostility toward us..." and rejected the accusations. Ersoy also pointed to security camera footage in the elevators, claiming that Köşker's statements were baseless.

Köşker shared her response to Ersoy's claims via her social media account. In her statement, she said, "If the issue is merit, you have to explain this situation to the public in a logical way. If the issue is other dynamics, then you cannot brush the matter off by calling it 'hostility.' I have always said it, I am still saying it, and I will say it again: May God protect all women from those who use their reproductive organs instead of merit and conscience."

In her statement, Köşker noted that accusing women who report harassment of "harboring hostility because they were fired" is a familiar attitude, and she included details regarding her own departure from the job. She emphasized that whether she resigned or was fired could easily be learned from the Human Resources Manager and touched upon the details of her departure process.

The former anchor recalled that the channel management had proposed a position change to her and that she decided to resign after not accepting this proposal.

Köşker also pointed out that there are numerous allegations of harassment against women in the industry, stating that her own departure was also a result of these processes as a woman in her profession.

'ONE REALLY MUST ASK'

Stating that she has no hostility toward the Habertürk brand, Köşker said, "On the contrary, it is an institution where I worked with pleasure and gave my labor. One really must ask how an anchor could have hostility toward the channel they work for."

Köşker pointed out that other experienced female anchors were also forced to leave the channel during the same period, stating that the reason for this should also be explained. She implied that other dynamics rather than merit might have been preferred in the selections.

Questioning with what editorial criteria it could be explained that a person with zero screen experience was assigned to one of the country's leading news channels, Köşker concluded her statement by saying, "If the issue is merit, you have to explain this situation to the public in a logical way. If the issue is other dynamics, then you cannot brush the matter off by calling it 'hostility.'"

Köşker also included the following words in her social media statement:

"Accusing a woman who voices harassment allegations of 'harboring hostility because she was fired' is, unfortunately, a very familiar defense reflex in this country.

Did I resign, or was I fired; it is not difficult to learn this. It can be asked of the Human Resources Manager of the time. Furthermore, it can easily be verified who called the Human Resources Manager and said, 'We are very pleased with her work, but we offered her a position change; she wants to resign because she did not accept it. We could not convince her.'

If it is claimed that I acted 'absurdly,' the following question is inevitable: Why was such a person kept at the channel for a long time, and why did she anchor the main news?

It should not be forgotten that my entry into Habertürk was through a female manager. The problem began when this person, whose harassment of many women in the sector is known to everyone, was made editor-in-chief; for me, the process ended with the decision to resign that I made to protect myself. These sentences mean a lot to those who want to understand.

I do not have the slightest hostility toward the Habertürk brand. On the contrary, it is an institution where I worked with pleasure and gave my labor. One really must ask how an anchor could have hostility toward the channel they work for.

The answer to this question must also be given: If the issue was my behavior, how do you explain the removal of other experienced female anchors from the channel during the same period?

Were these people also acting 'absurdly,' or was there a will to make room for other choices made on the screen based on romantic affairs?

For example; with what editorial criteria can it be explained that a name with no television background, no screen experience, and whose professional formation belongs to a completely different field, finds a place on one of the country's most established news screens with zero broadcasting experience?

If the issue is merit, you have to explain this situation to the public in a logical way. If the issue is other dynamics, then you cannot brush the matter off by calling it 'hostility.'

I have always said it, I am still saying it, and I will say it again: May God protect all women from those who use their reproductive organs instead of merit and conscience."