How should the right of 'correction and reply' work in the media?

Media ombudsman and 12punto columnist Faruk Bildirici addressed the 'right of correction and reply' in the media in his column today. Stating that the essential principle is to respect the right of correction and reply, Bildirici drew attention to the legal problems surrounding this right in Turkey. Bildirici said, "In practice, we very frequently see rulings where the boundaries of the right of correction and reply are exceeded and the right is abused."

METHODS OF CORRECTION AND APOLOGY IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Those who equate lies with mistakes in journalism create confusion. And they sometimes do this knowingly. However, there is a big difference between the two. A lie is the intentional and planned dissemination of information that is not true. The words journalism and lie cannot and should not come together; because a journalist writing a fake news story is an activity outside of journalism, which is a betrayal of journalism.

A mistake, on the other hand, is more innocent than a lie because it is made as a result of an unintended error. In journalism, one must avoid mistakes, but 100 percent error-free work is not possible. This is because journalists feel a time pressure that is even greater today than it was in the past. In the digital universe, of which we journalists are also a part, everything flows by very quickly. Instant news has now replaced daily news.

The time pressure on the journalist is one of the important factors that cause mistakes in news. Failing to conduct sufficient research, not verifying data, and not obtaining opposing views can also lead to errors or omissions in news. A journalist, who is obligated to always convey accurate information to people without distorting the truth, primarily damages their own credibility and that of the media organization they work for when they make a mistake. A mistake also harms the parties involved.

If it is understood that a piece of news or information is contrary to the truth, it must be corrected immediately, and an apology must be offered to the affected parties who have suffered harm. Just as the mistake was made in front of all readers and viewers, the correction and apology must be offered in the same way, in a manner visible to the widest possible audience of readers and viewers. The correction should be made in the same medium, using the same method, and if possible, by the same journalist or writer.

In the years when I started journalism, our news editor at Cumhuriyet, Erbil Tuşalp, had a saying about mistakes that he repeated very often and that I never forgot: "Doctors bury their mistakes, tailors hide their mistakes between stitches, but journalists put their mistakes in front of thousands of people every day." By saying this, he would emphasize both the importance of avoiding mistakes and explain that it is impossible for a journalist to hide their mistake, and therefore it is inevitable to correct the mistake in the eyes of all readers.

Journalism requires transparency in all circumstances and at all times. A journalist cannot have any activity hidden from their readers or viewers. That is why mistakes must be corrected not in a hidden, secretive, or indirect way, but in a form that everyone can see. Making corrections in a way that all readers and viewers can see and learn about proves good intentions regarding purging mistakes and sends the message to the reader and viewer that their trust has not been abused. The loss of trust caused by a mistake can only be compensated in this way.

Sometimes, even if the information conveyed is true, the people involved may want to respond to what is written or said about them and explain their views. Responding is a natural right of people, just like requesting a correction.

If an "opposing view" has not been included in the published news, respecting the right of correction and reply and displaying a fair and objective approach is mandatory in terms of journalism. The Declaration of Rights and Responsibilities of Journalists in Turkey also emphasizes that the right of correction and reply should be recognized and that one should not avoid correcting mistakes. Furthermore, it underscores the importance of self-criticism when correcting a mistake.

METHODS OF CORRECTION IN DIGITAL MEDIA

In the past, it was easier to correct what was written and to include reply texts. Even if it was a few days later, publishing it on the same page and column of the newspaper would suffice. But now we are in the digital age. Correcting mistakes in the digital universe is a much more difficult and complicated task. While printed newspapers are archived after the day is over and can only be seen by those interested, digital archives remain online constantly and can appear before new readers just as they did the moment they were first published. For this reason, it is important that a correction in the digital universe either removes the false news or information or that the mistake and the correction/reply text appear together.

Undoubtedly, the fundamental journalistic principles regarding the right of correction and reply apply exactly the same in the virtual universe. The essential thing is to respect the right of correction and reply and not to avoid correcting a mistake even if the subject of the news has not objected. Instead of using vague expressions such as "minor adjustments were made" or "it has been clarified" to cover up the fact that a correction was made, it is necessary to clearly state that it is a correction and an apology. It is also important that corrections are written in understandable language and are comprehensive.

If there is a material error in a news story, article, or visual on a webpage, it should not be avoided to take it into account and correct it immediately, even if the warning comes from a person or organization that is not directly involved. Elements such as insult, discrimination, humiliation, marginalization, and hate speech that lead to people's victimization or cause an existing victimization to continue/increase must also be corrected without delay.

In journalism, which is a human-centered profession, the fundamental principle is not to harm people and, primarily, to protect them. Depending on the importance and potential impact of the mistake, the page where the news is located can be completely removed from publication. Of course, in such a case, placing a note on that link regarding the reason for the page's removal serves an enlightening function. Because the original state of a deleted link and all modified versions remain in the cache pages of search engines, and those searching can reach them even years later.

It is mandatory for the update date and time to appear at the beginning of the page after every correction. Not only should the update be stated at the beginning, but information about the correction and, if necessary, an apology note should also be added to the bottom of the page. The same method should be followed for the right of reply. In cases where the subject of the relevant news wants to exercise their right of reply, the reply text can be added in a way that does not disrupt the integrity of the news or article.

Depending on the situation, the reply and correction text can also be arranged as a separate box. This addition must also be in a visible form and on the same page as the news. Of course, the date and time of the update must be stated again; the change note must also be presented on the same page and in a distinguishable manner.

A new development or change regarding a previously published news story should be added as a box below or next to the old news instead of being published as a different news story. Thus, the news or article becomes a comprehensive text containing the latest developments for new readers. If the news has been shared on social media before, it is useful to share it again on the relevant platform with a correction or update note.

It is not necessary to make a correction statement for typos and material errors. However, in rare cases, a correction note may become mandatory for material errors that change the meaning or lead to misunderstandings.

CIRCULATION OF FAKE NEWS ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Universal journalistic rules apply exactly the same on social media. Because a journalist cannot shed their professional identity on social media either. Just as one should not insult anyone during journalistic activities, or use expressions that are humiliating, mocking, discriminatory, sexist, or contain hate speech, such posts should not be made on social media either.

More importantly, a journalist should not share information on social media that has not been checked and verified from its source, just as they would not when writing news, and should not pass judgment on anyone like a judge or prosecutor. A wrong expression or information written inadvertently should be deleted or corrected immediately. However, completely deleting the old post is often not enough for a correction. In special cases, such as when someone is unfairly accused, a correction and an apology note must also be shared so that those who read or saw that post before can learn the truth.

However, it is mandatory for the incorrect post and the correction note to appear together. Because those who saw the incorrect post may not see the correction, and in this case, the spread of the mistake cannot be prevented. Examples where people who see an old incorrect post even after a long time re-share this post and put the mistake back into circulation are very common.

In the "Community Notes" method applied on X so that the mistake and the correction note can be seen together, participants can leave their notes under the posts. These notes are then turned into a report about that post, and posts that violate community rules are labeled. However, when a correction and apology note is added under an incorrect post, the first post is still highlighted on X; the correction section may not be noticed enough. Therefore, quoting the original post to share the correction or apology text stands out as a more effective method to ensure more people see it.

Another method could be to delete the incorrect post while correcting it and re-share it by adding a correction and apology note to the image/photo of the deleted post. Thus, both the correction note and the mistake can be seen together, and the incorrect post can be prevented from being put back into circulation by someone else inadvertently later on.

On Facebook, user notes are also taken into account for labeling or completely deleting a post. But the reviews of fact-checking platforms are primarily taken as the basis for labeling a post as incorrect. If an incorrect post has been flagged, it is necessary not only to delete it but also to inform the fact-checking platform. Otherwise, even if the post is deleted, it remains on record that that person or media organization made an incorrect post.

In addition, international social media platforms can also delete content or restrict access to it on the grounds that it does not comply with their own publishing principles. A restriction came to platforms from the European Parliament on this issue. With the "Media Freedom Act" newly adopted by the EP General Assembly, international online platforms such as Facebook, X, or Instagram are prohibited from "arbitrarily restricting or deleting" content in the media. These platforms will notify the media organization of their intention to remove or restrict their content and will grant them 24 hours to respond. They will be able to delete or restrict the content in question after the response provided by the media.

Of course, it is necessary for the reader and viewer to know how these correction and apology methods I have conveyed so far are applied by the media organization. The way to do this is not to be content with universal principles, but to include correction and reply procedures and the methods applied in detail in corporate publishing principles texts. The page where the BBC collects corrections, apologies, and clarifications is also a successful example in terms of informing the reader.

IN WHICH CASES IS THE RIGHT OF CORRECTION AND REPLY VALID?

Of course, journalists and media organizations sometimes do not correct mistakes on their own or cannot agree with the parties involved that the news and articles are contrary to the truth. Sometimes, as has been common in Turkey in recent years, those in power and authority may attempt to deny even accurate news and try to discredit the journalist.

In such cases, difficulties may arise in recognizing the right of correction and reply, and the submitted text may not be published directly. If the texts sent by the subjects of the news or their lawyers directly or through a notary are not published, the law will inevitably come into play.

In the past, the term "tekzip", which means denial and explaining that something is not true in Arabic, was used. Later, the Turkish term "Right of correction and reply" replaced it in legal texts. The "Right of correction and reply" is a right guaranteed by the constitution and whose rules of application are regulated by laws. The following definition is included in Article 32 of the Constitution:

"The right of correction and reply is recognized only in cases where the dignity and honor of individuals are touched upon or publications contrary to the truth are made about them, and it is regulated by law.

If the correction and reply are not published, the judge decides whether it should be published or not within seven days at the latest from the date of the application of the interested party."

According to Article 14 of the Press Law, "in case of a publication that violates the honor and dignity of individuals or is contrary to the truth about individuals, the responsible manager must use the correction and reply text sent by the person who suffered harm from this, which does not contain criminal elements and is not contrary to the legally protected interests of third parties, without making any corrections or additions."

The same article of the law regulates the conditions for using the right of correction and reply and the application periods; it is stated that if the text to be sent is not published, the Criminal Court of Peace will make the decision.

For television, there are regulations similar to the Press Law in the RTÜK and TRT laws. It is stated that "real and legal persons can use this right in case of a publication that violates their honor and dignity or is contrary to the truth about them."

LEGAL PROBLEMS IN PRACTICE

However, in the legal exercise of this right, the correction and reply text must be limited to the content of the publication and the allegations. The Declaration of Rights and Responsibilities of Journalists in Turkey includes the principle: "The journalist must respect the right of reply, provided that it is not abused and is done in an acceptable manner."

Criminal Judges of Peace must examine whether the right is being abused in the correction and reply text before them, whether it is relevant and limited to the content of the publication, whether there are criminal expressions in the text, and whether it contains insults to the journalist and the media organization. But unfortunately, in practice, we very frequently see rulings where the boundaries of the right of correction and reply are exceeded and the right is abused. Criminal Judges of Peace can automatically accept correction and reply texts without examining them sufficiently. Even texts that use expressions that exceed the limits of accusation and amount to insults can be sent to the media through the court and published.

For example, in the correction and reply text sent from the İzmir 21st Criminal Court of First Instance regarding the news titled "Let this be a lesson to Switzerland" published in Hürriyet in 2010, it was not enough to deny the news, but insulting expressions such as "everyone who made, wrote, printed, signed, or contributed to the publication of this news are people devoid of moral values" were included. The judge who decided that such a text should be published exactly as it was, while observing the rights and laws of the applicant, had ignored the personality rights of the journalist and helped them be subjected to insults.

Furthermore, the Criminal Court of Peace accepts requests for correction and reply from members of the political power or their relatives almost without any examination. When this happens, the exercise of the right of correction and reply is applied against press freedom and for the purpose of putting pressure on the media. Moreover, the media is not granted the "right to a fair trial"; criminal courts of peace make decisions without granting the right to present evidence and the right to defense. When the power of political authority is added to the legal vacuum, critical news can easily be accepted as contrary to the truth in courts.

In two texts sent to BirGün by Fatih Savaş, the lawyer of Turkuvaz Media Group Deputy Chairman of the Board Serhat Albayrak, it was claimed that BirGün "trampled on journalistic values," the newspaper was condemned, and the newspaper and journalists were openly insulted.

Similarly, in the correction and reply text sent to Cumhuriyet by Berat Albayrak, the brother of Serhat Albayrak and a former minister, the expression "at the end of the day, it will be the aforementioned journalists who lose their reputation and have not received their share of press ethical values and reporting principles" was used, and the writer Miyase İlknur was condemned. Minister Mustafa Varank was also able to describe Cumhuriyet as a "hitman newspaper" in one of his denials.

THE RIGHT OF CORRECTION AND REPLY AS A TOOL OF PRESSURE

The right of correction and reply as a tool of pressure

While the right of reply and correction is turned into a tool of pressure and obstruction by the judiciary in printed media, radio, and television, a different legal system is applied for news websites. There is no provision regarding the right of correction and reply in the law on the regulation of publications made in the internet environment. Instead of correcting the mistake, this law brings sanctions such as blocking access to news websites and removing content.

Moreover, the access blocking decisions given by Criminal Judges of Peace are implemented first, and then they can be appealed. There is no court limitation to apply for access blocking. To these regulations, the broad powers of the President of the Information and Communication Technologies Authority regarding access blocking and content removal were added with the latest amendment to the law. Fortunately, the Constitutional Court canceled these powers of the BTK President on the grounds that they are "limiting freedom of expression and the press."

It is not yet clear how this decision of the AYM will be implemented, but Turkey is sinking into darkness every year with access blocks and content removal, along with the blocking of URL addresses. According to the "Freedom on the Net Report" published by Freedom House, Turkey was in the category of "countries where the internet is not free" in 2023, which includes countries such as Russia, China, Iran, and Belarus.

According to the Free Web Turkey Internet Censorship Report, in 2022, access blocking decisions were made for at least 40 thousand 536 URLs, including 35 thousand 66 domain names, 3 thousand 196 news stories, 2 thousand 90 social media posts, and 184 social media accounts. Most of all, news about President Erdoğan, his family, and people and organizations close to the AKP were blocked.

For press and freedom of expression, it is urgent to get out of the environment of access blocks, content removal, and address bans. In the application of the right of reply and correction, regulations based not on bans, but on universal journalistic principles and respect for humans are necessary.

News Source: 12punto