Turkish press tackles terrorism coverage
By Chris Conybeare Posted Jul 1 2004
Explsions hit the Turkish headquarters of the London-based HSBC bank and the British consulate Nov. 20, 2003, killing at least 25 people and wounding about 400.
On a peaceful November morning, Istanbul was shattered by two suicide bombings in heavily populated neighborhoods. Twenty were killed and 60 wounded in the attacks. The targets were synagogues; victims were Jews at worship and their Muslim neighbors. Because both locations were near television stations, live images of death and destruction went on air instantly.
In the days following, police and security officials refused to establish official spokespersons and regular press brief-ings, forcing Turkish media to rely heavily on anonymous sources and report speculation regarding the attacks. Headlines and talk shows agreed that “Islamic Terrorists” or “Islamist Terror” were to blame. Meanwhile, police rounded up suspects, and leaks to the press were numerous.
Five days after the attack, on Nov. 20, suicide bombers unleashed two more massive explosions. This time the symbolic targets were the British Consulate and the headquarter offices of the HSBC Bank, a British banking conglomerate. These explosions caused massive destruction. Collapsing buildings crushed people and cars, and flying glass and debris decapitated and maimed bystanders. Although the British consul general and members of his staff were killed, the majority of victims were Turkish citizens who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The combined death toll for the four bombings reached 60, with as many as 600 wounded.
Within minutes of the consulate and HSBC attacks, television stations had cameras on the scene, and graphic images were shown to the nation. Just days after the bombings, another kind of attack was launched. This one was aimed at the media by police and security officials.
On Nov. 18, the public prosecutor banned “the publishing of any information that would influence the investigation.”
On Nov. 20, Public Prosecutor Ahmet Kelebek issued a ban, sustained by a judge, on virtually all coverage of the bombings and police investigations.
The ban was largely ignored since much of the prohibited activity had taken place before the ban was issued. But the media condemned the ban anyway as an illegal restriction on press freedom.
Another challenge faced the media. The graphic nature of the coverage began to attract criticism. Many Turkish citizens, 98 percent of whom are Muslim, took issue with repeated references to “Islamic Terror.”
Shortly after the four attacks, Ekrem Dumanli, general managing editor of the Islamic-oriented newspaper Zaman, called Oktay Eksi, senior columnist of Hurriyet and chairman of the Basin Konseyi (Press Council of Turkey).
Dumanli suggested that the Basin Konseyi should assemble media representatives to explore common ground concerning how to handle these issues.
The Basin Konseyi, on one day's notice, was able to obtain participation from 36 high-level representatives, including managing editors, news directors and senior journalists from both print and electronic journalism. There were 27 people representing 12 national newspapers, eight national TV broadcasters and nine members of the public from the Basin Konseyi board. Mustafa Karahasanoglu of the religious paper Vakit was among the first at the meeting to raise concerns about the media's use of the phrase “Islamist Terror” in their accounts of the bombings.
Those attending the meeting were frank in their self-criticism and eager to formulate common understandings about how to handle sensitive topics. There was a wide-ranging discussion about government, police, security forces and the unmet needs of the media for reliable information.
The same day that media representatives were deliberating issues relating to terrorism, funeral services were held for police officers killed in the second wave of attacks.
Among those officiating at these services were Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Director of Security and Chief of Istanbul's Police Celalettin Cerrah. These services were broadcast live to the nation and covered by virtually all Turkish media, as well as a variety of international news organizations.
When Security Director Cerrah addressed the audience, he laid blame for the police's inability to apprehend the culprits on “irresponsible media” who, by speculating on names of suspects, prevented their apprehension.
He blamed the media and press freedom for the deaths resulting from the second bombings. “For the sake of press freedom, that's why 27 human beings died,” Cerrah said. “Mr. Prime Minister, there must be some change in the Press Law.”
The prime minister added comments about the press ignoring the state security court's ban and “continuing to show horrific scenes and other information about police operations.” To the audience, he said, “I ask you, is this responsible activity?”
These remarks resulted in an almost immediate and unprecedented barrage of counter-criticism by the press, leveled against government attempts to curtail freedom of expression.
Eksi, who convened the Nov. 22 meeting, was interviewed on NTV and set the tone of the response to the security chief's remarks: “How dare he talk about press freedom? He is responsible for the safety of the people, and it is not his place to limit freedom of expression!” These remarks were featured on almost all major news outlets, and the subject quickly became one of the hot topics for discussion by commentators and talk shows hosts.
One day later, Eksi was featured as a call-in guest on a national television program. After greeting Eksi, the host dialed in Security Director Cerrah and asked him to comment on his statements. Much to everyone's surprise, Cerrah immediately apologized: “I must admit that I am an emotional person, and that I suddenly found myself making those unplanned remarks. I can assure you these statements won't be repeated.”
On Nov. 24, Basin Konseyi representatives met with Cerrah and Istanbul Governor Guler. The government officials made formal apologies and discussed the need for police and government authorities to establish clear lines of communication, appoint official spokespersons and commit to regular and speedy factual briefings in future responses to terrorist and other catastrophic events.
Despite these developments, high-level criticism against the media continued. On Nov. 25, Prime Minister Erdogan, whose political party has roots in Islamic fundamentalism, castigated the press for its use of the words “Islamist” and “Islamic Terrorism.”
Only nine days after the second bomb attacks, 40 persons representing most of Turkey 's media assembled again to consider the working group's proposal.
After two hours of discussion, a declaration was issued on a range of issues, from the use of terminology to describe terrorists to the use of violent images in print and broadcast. Demands were made on police and government officials for the establishment of clear lines of communication, designation of official spokespersons, rapid release of accurate information and regular press briefings. The group made it clear that attempts to ban media coverage were baseless and had no place in a democratic society.
While addressing his ruling party's caucus a few days after the media summit, Prime Minister Erdogan congratulated the Basin Konseyi for its recent role: “I would like to thank the Basin Konseyi for institutionalizing the process of self-criticism and for making their public declaration.”
Immediately following these events, there was a marked change in police behavior. Lines of communication were opened and regular press briefings were held. Security police officials began to meet with a number of journalists to assess needs.
Despite progress, a Basin Konseyi media survey in February of 27 media companies (both print and broadcast) found that a majority said communication with police officials had not improved.
On March 9, suicide bombers attacked a Masonic Lodge in Istanbul . The level of destruction (two dead and six wounded) was less severe than the November attacks, and the site's distance from TV stations slowed the deployment of cameras. According to Eksi, the majority of news organizations, in response to police requests, voluntarily withheld names of perpetrators for more than 48 hours. The Basin Konseyi continues to review these matters and is prepared to issue a further call to action, should conditions so warrant.