The stick on the media: The Press Advertisement Institution

The decisions of the The Press Advertisement Institution (BİK) have been a major problem for critical newspapers in recent years. BİK was established in 1961 to distribute official announcements and advertisements and to support the press and its employees, with the motto ‘no feeding press’, and has been transformed by the economic and political conditions of the time. 

As Fatih Polat of the daily Evrensel writes, during the AKP’s rule BİK became a sword of Damocles for newspapers that criticised the government’s actions or exposed corruption and injustice. Cumhuriyet, Sözcü, BirGün and Evrensel are among the most punished newspapers. The common reasons for the fines are the same: reporting on corruption and criticising the government. 

In 2019, BİK suspended Evrensel’s right to publish official announcements and advertisements on the grounds that its readers bought more than one newspaper from vendors and that the newspaper’s subscription and registration books were not kept regularly. 

In a recent ruling on newspapers, including Evrensel, the Constitutional Court stated that BİK’s advertising and advertising cut-offs were a violation of freedom of expression and freedom of the press. However, this has not changed the situation for Evrensel or other newspapers, which have been subjected to various punishments. 

In the September issue of the journal Culture and Communication, academic Vahdet Mesut Ayan published an article entitled “The Press Advertising Agency as an Instrument of Repression: The Case of Evrensel Newspaper” in the September issue of Culture and Communication. It analyses the transformation of BİK from its foundation to the present day with reference to the fines imposed on the left-wing socialist newspaper Evrensel. 

In her study, Ayan states that the freedom of the press in Turkey has been under pressure not only in the last few years but also since the foundation of the Republic, and she relates these punishments, which restrict/obstruct the freedom of the press and the public’s right to information and the right to receive news, to readers and employees. We took the opportunity to interview Ayan about newspapers and journalism in Turkey.

The sanctions do not only affect journalists, but also readers…

Your article entitled “The Press Advertising Agency as an Instrument of Repression: The Case of Evrensel Newspaper’ was published in the journal Kültür ve İletişim. First of all, I would like to start with the following question: Why do you consider the Press and Advertising Board (BİK) to be an apparatus of repression?

First of all, I would like to say that although the title of the article refers to Louis Althusser’s work “The Ideological Devices of the State”, the article is not based on Althusser’s concept. Althusser’s approach to the media has been widely used in the analysis of the Turkish media with the contributions of the structuralist perspective, but this approach is insufficient to evaluate and understand the complex relations between media, politics and economy in the current situation. 

In fact, in Althusser’s conceptualisation, the media is understood as an ideological apparatus in the process of producing and reproducing the hegemony of the dominant classes. However, the media is not only an ideological apparatus for the ruling classes, it is a composite tool that both serves the accumulation of capital and spreads the oppression of the central powers throughout society. 

On the other hand, my article about the sanctions of the The Press Advertisement Institution (BİK) against the newspaper Evrensel reveals the sanctions of an institution in the field of the press whose main purpose is to provide financial support to the press through the distribution of official announcements and advertisements, regardless of any opinion or jurisprudence. Moreover, this article is shaped by the opinions of the readers and employees of the newspaper. Therefore, it also aims to develop a self-reflexive approach.

The concept of ‘pressure apparatus’ in the title indicates that a bureaucratic organisation in the field of media imposes sanctions on a media outlet with certain motives and methods. The employees and readers of the newspaper I interviewed for this article explained that the sanctions imposed on the newspaper are related to the political line of the newspaper and that the sanctions do not only affect the newspaper, but also the journalists and readers. 

Sanctions range from advertising cuts to criminal prosecution

Today, many ‘opposition’ media organisations are fined by BİK and RTÜK, even up to the maximum. In a way, however, these fines also increase solidarity with the organisation or individual. So why are fines still seen as a ‘deterrent’?

It increases solidarity because the main source of income for many media organisations that are far from the government comes from viewers or readers. This is particularly the case for newspapers. Media organisations close to the government benefit from both advertising revenues and public subsidies. For example, many public institutions and public banks give their advertisements mainly to pro-government newspapers and television channels, so in a sense, media organisations that are not close to the government rely only on their readers or viewers. 

However, solidarity practices, as we see in the case of Evrensel, also show that media organisations create an organic readership, which we should not hope for. 

Therefore, the pressure that BİK is exerting on Evrensel through fines goes beyond the newspaper and targets a part of society and also suppresses freedom of the press and freedom of expression. This is exactly what the concept of “pressure apparatus” refers to. Through BİK, an organisation that has been publishing in Turkey for almost 30 years is being punished along with its employees and readers, thus restricting the freedom of press/communication.

But regardless of reader/viewer practices, fines are a stick that the government holds over media organisations; it does not always hit them, of course, but it continues to hold the stick. 

If publications and news do not fall within certain limits set by the government, the sanctions range from advertising cuts to corporate fines to investigations and prosecutions of journalists. 

In a sense, the fines put newspapers or television stations out of business. This is where the deterrent effect of fines comes into play. Of course, the fact that this is not done directly by the government but by autonomous organisations such as RTÜK and BİK is another problem; both organisations use fines as a kind of violence in the press/communication field in order to silence different voices. 

Economic crisis, paper and distribution costs put newspapers in a difficult situation

We see that Evrensel has tried to overcome this process mainly with the support of its readers. Other press/media organisations that have been subjected to similar punishments can also rely on the support of their readers or audiences. Given the economic situation of Turkish readers, can this situation be sustained? Should we be worried about the fate of Evrensel and, by extension, the opposition media?

It is necessary to stress the following: If we focus on Evrensel, the newspaper defines itself as a working class press, and if we look at the institutional history and the publications of the newspaper, as well as the opinions of the readers and employees in the article, it would be correct to say that Evrensel is a working class press. This is a reality. 

Secondly, and in relation to your question, the economic crisis that has been going on in Turkey since 2018 and the medium-term programme that has been implemented as a remedy for this crisis is progressing in a way that impoverishes and dispossesses the working class. There are two important points here that affect the publishing life of newspapers like Evrensel: Firstly, the economic crisis increases paper and distribution costs, which makes the financial power of newspapers more difficult. Secondly, authoritarianism in politics is leading the central government to silence different voices. 

The most prominent example of the methods and tools used by the government to silence voices in the press is the drying up of newspapers’ financial resources through BİK. This is where BİK’s fines against Evrensel come into play. 

Secondly, the poverty and unemployment in the ranks of the working class causes serious problems in the access of this class to information. The working class does not have access to printed publications due to the effects of the crisis; the need for newspapers, magazines and books lags behind other vital needs such as housing and food. So it is very difficult to say that reader support here will be sustained in the long term. 

Restrictions on freedom of press/communication and problems with access to information show that we should be concerned about the future of publications that are distant from the government and from democracy.

How do sanctions affect journalists’ working conditions and personal rights?

Penalties not only affect journalists’ view of their profession and their passion for it, but unfortunately also have a negative impact on their working conditions. In this way, we can say that the financial sanctions against Evrensel are two-dimensional. 

Sanctions make journalism impossible in Turkey and worsen the working conditions of journalists. Nevertheless, based on the answers given by the workers in this article, we can say that the newspaper workers, like the readers, have an organic attachment to the media. 

Criminal law has become a tool of pressure

What are the main problems of the press/media in Turkey and is it possible to overcome them in a positive way?

The most fundamental problem in Turkey and in the world in general is the direct relationship between the media and the centres of capital and interests. This is a kind of relationship that harms media organisations, media workers and the journalistic profession as a whole. If we add to this the practices in authoritarian regimes such as Turkey, the problem becomes even more serious. 

In general, as we see in the case of Turkey, supervisory, regulatory and supportive public institutions become repressive apparatuses of authoritarian governments. Regrettably, while public funds are transferred to pro-government media organisations, independent broadcasting is left financially defenceless through sanctions.

Another important issue is the working conditions of journalists. In Turkey, flexible and precarious working conditions are imposed on journalists and significant obstacles are put in front of their organised struggle. 

With the weakening of trade unions and professional organisations, journalists have become precarious in the face of media bosses. This is one of the main reasons for the crisis in journalism. Another important issue is the disappearance of the independence of the judiciary in Turkey. 

The transformation of penal provisions into a tool of pressure restricts both freedom of thought and expression and freedom of press/communication. As a result, especially since 2016, hundreds of journalists have been investigated, prosecuted and arrested. 

In addition, institutions such as media organisations, which are supposed to monitor, regulate and fund the press, are open to political influence and their relations with vested interests exacerbate the problems. 

Of course, it is possible to overcome these problems in a positive way. First of all, a social formation that can break the relationship between media organisations and capital and politics, and an approach that eliminates the distribution shock and income injustice, will be the solution to certain problems of both society and the press/media.