Hostility Benefits Neither Turkey Nor the US
And obviously the problems that were not dealt with on the right time, have taken on a new dimension, which causes to a headache for the society.
For example, Americans have been saying for a long time that hostility towards the U.S. is on rise in Turkey, and they have been expressing their concern about the situation. It has not been discussed that how much of the problem is due to Anti-Americanism and how much is due to concerns about current U.S. policies. A BBC poll was the icing on the cake. According to a survey, Turkey leads a list of nations that view Bush’s second term in the White House negatively…
A new discussion flared up with an article harshly criticizing Turkey published in The World Street Journal (WSJ) on 16 February. Even title of the article by Robert L. Pollock was hurtful: "The Sick Man of Europe-Again." Referans and Radikal newspapers translated the article verbatim and shared it with their readers.
Pollock begins by scolding the government and then, with references to specific newspapers and articles, harshly criticizes the Turkish media. Not satisfied with this, the author addresses the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the American conspiracy theories raised by that party’s leader. He continues his criticism by saying, "Once upon a time, it was Ataturk’s party."
Turkey-US relations are on a tough test
It is clear that this article was written in a very harsh style which one rarely comes across an editorial with this much rage. There have been other articles criticizing Turkish politics, media, and army in the American media, but none have been this intense. That’s why there have been such harsh reactions to the article. Those who had a negative approach to the U.S. before, are smugly satisfied by this article.
Similar articles much harsher than the one in WSJ have been published in some Turkish newspapers in response. Pollock’s article was transformed into fuel for the fire by some. Is it the solution? The publication of such a harsh article by a newspaper like the WSJ, a world class brand, and the reactions raised do nothing to solve the problems between the two countries; nothing can be gained from this…
This much is clearly true: Turkey-US relations are on a tough test. It is known that tension has been growing for a long time. This tension dates back to the March 1, 2003 motion related to deployment of American forces in Turkey. Since then, many other things have built up resentment and rage. The art of diplomacy is made for times like this. Politicians should get involved now and tension should be decreased. Unfortunately, a battle of words was launched instead. In the end, US Assistant Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith got into the fray and said, "If Anti-Americanism does not cease, relations will become more difficult."
What will happen now? The easy response would be to continue the challenge. Who would benefit from this? Turkey? The US? Iraq? The Islamic world? No. No one will benefit from this fight. Reasonable approaches are definitely needed, but both sides are enraged and the problems have been dragged out for such a long time. The Iraqi War, the Turkomen, the future of Northern Iraq, various scenarios for a Kurdish state, the expectations about PKK [the Kurdish Workers’ Party] … Political intelligence is needed in the process right at this moment, just as the media needs to enter into the process responsibly…
The duty of the media is to explain incidents to readers objectively. That’s why it cannot ignore the problems. The media has a responsibility to share the information it obtains with the public, just as it has a responsibility to confirm how credible the information is. For editorials, the same sensitivity is at issue. Maturity in style and attitude when analyzing issues is essential for responsible journalism. If the goal is to burn bridges between the two countries, it is not hard to find speculative subjects. Provocative information is all around us. False and incorrect information, exaggerated interpretations, provocative statements, hurtful articles, anger evoking images, and hatred inducing photos… During such difficult times, both politicians and the media have historic levels of responsibility.
We must accept that conspiracy theories have an incredible attraction for a significant segment of society that approaches this kind of information with a great deal of excitement. When this is the case, those with a lust for circulation and ratings approach issues with passion. And we must accept that the world has never seen the intense bombardment of information as it sees today. The best "open intelligence" is conducted everyday. The power houses try to mold public opinion by spreading false information. The media is in the middle of a psychological war…
If the media sticks to its principles, society will not face such big problems. Is it hard to research the accuracy of each news story; is it hard to ask about information from a third source; is it hard to cross check news using several sources?
In recent years, the Internet has become the source of false news not just in Turkey but all over the world with the exception of a few serious internet media firms. In general, claims from unknown groups on unknown sites checked by unknown editors are published. Even worse, photos and images prepared in a digital environment can lead to big mistakes sometimes. Since the Internet is hardly bound by any legal standards, it encourages virtual liars. Newspapers and televisions have a share in this by going after speculative news without remembering the principles of the profession. The latest trendy expression is "hearing". Even the documented lies are supposed to earn legitimacy when "hearings" say so. The media should approach such events more carefully, especially when the subject is international relations …
The media should not feed tension
US policies, particularly those related to the Middle East, are tracked with concern here. The reason is very clear: a neighboring country is at war and it contains the risk of spread. The fear of the people is this. It may be a mistake to interpret the concerns of the people, or even their rage, as Anti-Americanism. With its accumulation of history and culture, it can be said that the Turkish nation, in general, does not feel hostility towards any society. It is impossible that a country that has been sympathetic to Americans up to yesterday can lead in Anti-Americanism today. The Turkish people have not forgotten that Americans helped Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo. The nation also remembers that Americans returned the PKK’s leader to Turkey…
The US media should approach the issue appropriately. The BBC survey is not convincing. To gather up fragments and conclude that Turkish people are Anti-American could lead to Anti-Turkish sentiments. Neither Anti-American sentiments in Turkey nor Anti-Turkish sentiments in the US are of any use to anyone.
The media should represent the common sense and align itself with it. People today want, and will always want the newspapers that do not hold back from writing the facts and that do not stray from the principles of the profession.
Newspapers are not published for the interests of some: if they are, they will face the conscience of the people and fall. Journalism is not practiced to grab ratings or circulation from the public conscience either. Therefore, a journalist must neither distort reality nor use it to provoke nationalist feelings in people. A journalist must never be responsible for broadening a crisis between two states, because journalism means a bit of moderation– especially when the subject matter is international relations…
