This article is about the media ownership issue and its distribution which is one of the titles that we discussed during “alternative media” leecture. I selected this topic as a research project; because, from my perspective, it is one of the most prominent and attractive titles in the course that is remained in my mind after this communication course. In order to obtain a critical point of view, it is inevitable to learn the media ownership and the relations between media monopolies. The audiences can interpret and criticize the news logically only if they are aware of this issue.
Media is mostly defined as a collective communication channel which stores and delivers information. But also, it has a crucial role in shaping public aspect towards to daily events. Therefore, the owners of the media have a power of control how the news will be perceived by society and how it will be discussed. The effect of media on the public, who can be called as receivers, cannot be underestimated. Hence the ownership has an importance and it should be under the control of reliable corporations. The independence and pluralism of the media ownership have a significance in achieving a healthy and democratic condition in media. So that in this system, the criticism against to anyone should be freely expressed, who is criticized should not be matter. The first step in finding a free and independent preference is to monitor the ownership structure of the media and secure the pluralism of this ownership. However, not only in Turkish media but also in worldwide, media is under the influence of big monopolies which allow owners to direct the attitude of the society towards daily events in which direction they want to exploit. Also, these monopolies have a relationship based on self-interest because they spread out very diverse sectors which means that they are contingent upon tender bid so that they need to behave accordingly. This issue forces them to keep on the right side of the state and the other monopolies. I found an informative video about the media ownership in America and the video gives an answer to the question of “Who Owns the Media?”. It is important to note that Turkey is not the only one that has big monopolies in media ownership.
When the relationship of the media owners is analyzed, it is obviously seen that they have a connection with the other sector like; mostly in construction, thermal power stations, advertising and so on. So that the owners use the media according to their needs and their self-interest. For instance, when these companies bid in a state tender, they flatter the decisions of the state and they illustrate the state as they take the straight decision even if they think the reverse. Because it is the only chance to win a tender. It shows that prejudiced news is shared with the audience and during this process, perception management is done. Hence, the media owners have the power to direct the public perception by using prejudiced news.
Besides, Bianet has a research about this issue has a name as “Media Ownership Monitor Turkey”. The research is based on the distribution of media channels between the holdings and relations of those holdings with other sectors, which tenders they won. Also, Graph Commons prepared a valid graphic about media ownership which was published on mulksuzlestirme.org that is controlled and changed frequently. You can reach the updated version from here. When the graphic is analyzed, most of the company partners who have the largest forty media organizations are businessmen. Because of their activities in non-media sectors, the transition and relation between profit, politics and editorial preferences are intertwined. To illustrate, eight leading companies in media (Doğan, Doğuş, Demirören, Ciner, Albayrak, Turkuaz / Zirve / Kalyon, İhlas ve ES groups) are also active in construction, energy, mining, tourism, telecommunication, banking, and finance sectors. This situation is called as cross-media ownership which totally prevents the independent publishing principle of the media. Therefore, it is possible to say that the media has an arrangement in which political relations and commercial interests are frontal.
When the distribution of the most popular television media outlets in Turkey is scrutinized, it is obvious that the owners of seven of the ten largest TV companies have the political bonds with the ruling party. Even after this information, how can it be possible to say that media is the voice of citizens? The owners of the media have the power to reorganize the news as their self-interest. As a result, the prejudiced news is published in the newspaper and broadcasted on TV. What is more, the income plays a crucial role in the media sector in order to lead publishing life; however, the source of income in media sector which is the public advertisement is also unfairly distributed between media companies because of this media ownership issue. It is possible to say that there is a political control over the financing of the media. There is no transparency of state advertisement distribution and the rules of this distribution are very vague and it depends on the relations. Thus, it is inevitable to criticize media and distribution of its income as unfair. For small-scale newspapers and TV channels, these advertisements play a vital role in the continuation of their publication lives. However, this small-scale and independent media companies cannot find a place in the state tenders. This situation causes the end of broadcast life of many small media groups and we cannot hear the voice of “others” in media, as a result we are exposed to only the propaganda of the state.
To sum up, it is significant to be aware of these relationships based on mutual interests and big monopolies in media sector who controls the publications of the news. While following the products of a media group, knowing the cross networks of the media owner gives the audience a chance to be critical about the news. Also thanks to this perspective, an audience can notice the hidden subtexts in the news and observes the relations.