Conspiracy theorists vs. columnists

Begüm Burak

The recent political turmoil that has been on the top of the agenda in the aftermath of the Dec. 17 corruption probe has been showing itself as an ontological problem for the media actors of today. In terms of conceptual conflicts, the first and foremost divide prevailing in the media scene is over the denomination of the Dec. 17 operation. The pro-government media from the very beginning labeled the operation started on Dec. 17 as a judicial coup against the Recep Tayyip Erdoğan government carried out by members of a “parallel state structure,” which mainly consists of people who government circles believe to be affiliated with the Hizmet movement.

The pool media that has been constituted by the political and financial patronage of the government has been acting as some sort of a weapon aiming to win the war of perceptions. The struggle of perceptions can be won by the promotion of the following argument, according to the pro-government media: “The Hizmet movement is a parallel state engaged in illegal activities and cooperating with internal enemies and external forces like Israel and the US to overthrow Erdoğan's government.” This argument is a paper tiger for all reasonable observers and people. Because, since the early 1970s, what Hizmet does and how it treasures democracy and rule of law have been known by almost everybody. However, still some people who do not want to accept the success of the Hizmet movement or its goals have been waging a smear campaign against Fethullah Gülen and Hizmet in line with the directives of some official circles.

The so-called journalists and columnists have taken the position in the aftermath of the Dec. 17 operation of delegitimizing and criminalizing the Hizmet movement through the pieces they write and publish. Some particular columnists have turned into conspiracy theorists to undermine the image of the Hizmet movement. A recent example of such conspiracy theories was evident in a piece which depicted the first rector in Turkey who wears a headscarf, Dicle University Professor Ayşegül Jale Saraç, as a member of the parallel state. Professor Saraç refuted this story the very next day and said that she would file a lawsuit over the fabricated report that she was a member of the parallel state.

This is how some media outlets work nowadays; I do not think that the media in Turkey have good credentials, and indeed what the future holds in terms of the media is not so hopeful for me …

P.S. I congratulate Yavuz Semerci for the brave attitude he adopted while many others have felt terrified to criticize the government.

Published on Today's Zaman, 17 April 2014, Thursday