TRANSFORMATION AT TDN

ferruh demirmen profdr
Spread the love

Dear Turkish Forum readers,

 

The article, “The new ‘moderate’ Turkey” By Robert Ellis (August 15, 2008) published in Turkish Forum recently reminded me of an incident similar to the one he experienced. At the end of his article Ellis notes that, although he had been a frequent commentator on Turkish affairs at Turkish Daily News (TDN) since 2005, he was declared “persona non grata” by TDN’s editor after he had written an article critical of Turkey’s AKP (Justice and Development Party) in Los Angeles Times last March.

 

I, too, was given the same treatment by TDN less than 2 years ago.

What attracted TDN’s ire, in my case, was an article, “After the French vote: Those crocodile tears,” I had published in TDN in late October 2006. About a month afterwards, another article I sent to TDN was summarily rejected without explanation. The timing coincided with the reshuffling of TDN’s management, with Eyüp Can Sağlık appointed as the new Executive Editor. Until that time, I had been an unpaid guest commentator at TDN, having some 40 articles published under my name since 2000. Sağlık is the husband of Elif Şafak, the Turkish activist-novelist adored by the Armenian lobby.

In the October 2006 article, written in the immediate aftermath of the French Parliament’ s infamous decision to criminalize denial of Armenian “genocide”, I chastised European and Turkish politicians as well as a certain “intellectual cabal” in Turkey for their hypocrisy on the genocide issue. Although I did not cite names, it was obvious to those familiar with the subject that Şafak was included in the “intellectual cabal.” Like my earlier TDN articles on the Armenian issue, my criticism of the “intellectual cabal” must have hit nerves in the Sağlık-Şafak couple. So, when Sağlık took over at TDN, he found a golden opportunity to silence me.

Thus came to an end a voice at TDN that had steadfastly defended Turks and Turkey against defamation by Dashnakian propagandists. A month later, ex-Ambassador Gündüz Aktan, another pro-Turkish voice on the Armenian issue, also left TDN.

 

The censorship Ellis and I suffered at TDN raises the question as to whose interests TDN is serving. Whatever its mission, and contrary to its high-minded claim, TDN does not welcome free expression of opinion. I am not surprised that Ellis was declared “persona non grata” because of his article critical of AKP. After the new leadership took over in late 2006, the newspaper has been publishing op-ed pieces by staff and guest writers openly in sympathy with AKP’s Islamic-oriented regime. These writers – the Second Republicans – oppose any nationalistic sentiments and try to undermine Turkey’s securalist regime. In fact, secularists and those espousing Turkishness are treated almost with contempt. One dimwit, an op-ed writer, is a proponent of faith-based “Intelligent Design.”

 

TDN is also sympatethic toward Armenian claims of “genocide.” In an August 25, 2008 editorial, editor David Judson issued a public apology because TDN had “mistakenly” added the word “alleged” in front of “genocide” in a recent op-ed by a Diaspora Armenian. A reader from Canada had protested that the original text did not contain “alleged.” The editor took the disclaimer to heart and apologized. The editor went on to explain that the newspaper, in fact, frowns upon the the term “so-called genocide.” Instead, the sanctioned term is “alleged genocide.”

 

Such hair-splitting of words could be ignored as pathetic sophomorism, except that it underlies a pro-Armenian tilt on the part of TDN. The editor claims that this stance represents “enlarged mentality.” Views sympathetic to Armenian position are expressed not only by Armenian writers, but also by Turkish journalists. Surely, rarely do these opinion articles spell out the word “genocide” – at least not yet – but the implication is that the onus of history is on Turks.

 

Months ago, I wrote a letter to TDN’s editor to protest my censorship and criticise the newspaper’s editorial policy. I challenged him to publish my letter, which he refused. He invited me to consider writing at TDN again, whıch I declined.

 

The new identity of TDN came into being after the newspaper became part of the Dogan Media Group. How, exactly, the newspaper turned from an objecive, independent English-language Turkish newspaper to a pro-Islamic (pro-AKP), pro-Armenian media outlet is an intriguing question. As far as the pro-Islamic tilt, the appointment of Sağlık as the Executive Editor undoubtedly had a lot to do with it. Sağlık, educated in the U.S. as a protege of Fethullah Gülen, was brought in to TDN as a Trojan horse to do the clergyman’s bidding. Before Sağlık came to TDN, he and his wife Şafak were affiliated with Zaman, Gülen’s flagship newspaper in Turkey. Şafak has recently resumed her writings in Zaman.

 

Other recruits close to AKP and Gülen include Cengiz Çandar and Mustafa Akyol. In addition to being a columnist, the latter acts as the deputy editor and vets articles submitted for the op-ed page. Akyol also writes in the AKP-controlled Star, and his articles appear on Gülen’s website on the Internet. It is a close-knit group under the effective stewardship of Sağlık.

 

As for TDN’s pro-Armenian tilt, it is safe to assume that the Sağlık-Şafak mindset and Editor-in-Chief David Judson’s own personal bias are what drove TDN in that direction. With its enlarged mentality,” the newspaper has lost much of its true Turkish identity. The irony in this transformation is that, while a nominally Turkish newspaper welcomes pro-Armenian views, Turks abroad face enormous obstacles to have their own views publıshed in foreign media because of ingrained anti-Turkish bias.

 

The most lamentable aspect of TDN’s new identity, however, lies in its influence on English-speaking foreign readership who seek news and opinions about Turkey. Few readers are probably aware that the newspaper is an unofficial mouthpiece of the pro-Islamic Turkish government. Opinions and letters from readers critical of AKP are hardly, if ever, published.

 

Likewise, the newspaper’s coverage of the Armenian issue plays into the hands of foreign entities that are intrinsically anti-Turkish. A good example is the Hrant Dink murder. The senseless and tragic murder of Turkish-Armenian journalist and activist Hrant Dink in January 2007 in Istanbul was widely condemned, and correctly so, in Turkey. Killing of every innocent human being deserves strong condemnation. TDN, however, went much further. With “We are all Hrant Dink” banners splashed across, and the op-ed writers mourning Dink’s death day after day, in pious detail, the newspaper inflamed passions. Sağlık promised that, if he had a son, he would name him Hrant. (A promise he did not keep).

 

Little did it occur to the foreign readers that none of these mourners expressed a genuine regret when many other Turkish intellectuals, prominenly in the footsteps of Kemal Atatürk, were similarly and tragically murdered. Nor did the mourners bother to invoke the memory of more than 40 Turkish diplomats that years ago fell victim to ASALA terror.

 

Washington D.C. is one place where TDN is well read for information about Turkey. There is little doubt that TDN’s coverage of the Dink murder provided fuel and ammunition for the ensuing anti-Turkish media onslaught spearheaded by ANCA (Armenian National Committee of America), as well as a U.S. Senate resolution (S.Res. 65) introduced by Senator Joe Biden. The resolution, passed in the U.S. Foreign Relations Committee in March 2007, was highly critical of Turkey. In the process, the real reason why Dink was prosecuted under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code was ignored.

 

Nor was any concern expressed in foreign circles for other Turkish intellectuals, including a 92-year old Sumerologist, that were prosecuted under the same penal code.

 

For those interested, I will be glad to forward a copy of my October 2006 article in TDN. Here is an excerpt:

It is not what these “intellectuals” say, but rather what they do not say, that matters. In their statements, writings, interviews and fiction work alluding to the 1915-1918 tragic events, they invariably depict Turks as the villains and Armenians as the victims, leaving out the perfidious acts of armed Armenian guerillas joining the enemy ranks and the death and sufferings of innocent Turks and Kurds at the hands of these gangs. Their one-sided recounting of the 1915-1918 events at times becomes nauseating.

None of them has ever bothered telling the world about the carnage of Azeri civilians in the Khojaly Massacre only 14 years ago.”

Ferruh Demirmen

ferruh@demirmen.com


Spread the love

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts