Economically speaking, the organization of media industries in Turkey is along capitalist structures, but it’s difficult to say that free market principles apply. There are a few private media groups that hold ownership of the majority of media content. In addition, censorship is a big issue, which only allows pro-government outlets to survive. Sadly, it is common to see journalists get arrested and media organizations get shut down after publishing critical articles. With such limited representation of views due to censorship and media oligopoly, it is difficult to talk about free market principles.
McChesney argues that in order to ‘democratize’ societies, mechanisms that “make the rule of many possible” should be created, which means incorporating noncommercial and nonprofit elements to the media system. In the authoritarian political context of Turkey, it is difficult to identify examples of media democratization in relation to McChesney’s definition. In this media landscape, outlets that help diversify the political views on media channels could be considered as contributing to the “rule of many” mentioned by the author. Within this context, Gazete Duvar could be considered as an example of a media outlet that democratizes media in Turkey.
Gazete Duvar is an online news portal, which mainly focuses on Turkish politics. Most of the journalists writing in this e-journal were formerly employed by bigger media companies in Turkey, but they were removed from their positions due to their articles criticizing the government. In the past, some of the articles on this website have been removed and access to certain pages were blocked by the government. The platform also has an English version, which was launched with the goal of providing unbiased information about the events in Turkey for the English-speaking audiences.
The company mostly makes money through advertisements, but also receives funding from Europe and U.S., which is an issue that has been brought up in relation to the impartiality of this outlet. In fact, the editor-in-chief of this publication has recently resigned and stated that the increased percentage of funding from other countries was creating problems with his editorial independence. Although the contributions of this platform to the “democratization of media” is limited with its financial dependance, it still diversifies the perspectives available for the reader. This could be considered as the first step that will eventually lead to a democratized media in McChesney’s conception.
Until the freedom of press is established in Turkey, media outlets like Gazete Duvar will do most of the work of democratizing media by challenging authoritarianism.
Although the financial contributions of different countries limit the editorial independence of Gazete Duvar, it should be noted that their support might be the sole reason for this platform’s survival. Financial support from powerful countries in Europe has political implications as well, which might function as a disincentive for Turkish government to shut down this media outlet completely. Considering the media landscape of Turkey, this might be the only solution for publications like Gazete Duvar to exist.
Turkey is the second-most media illiterate country in Europe, meaning that the public opinion can be heavily shaped by media.
The current government uses low education and low media literacy levels for its own advantage by only allowing positive representations of their governance to circulate, which explains the heavy censorship methods that they employ. Gazete Duvar tries to get around these restrictions by publishing electronically. Although the regulations over the Internet also increase in Turkey, the vast array of content and platforms makes it more difficult to control compared to traditional media channels. Until the freedom of press is established in Turkey, media outlets like Gazete Duvar will do most of the work of democratizing media by challenging authoritarianism.