As traditional media in Turkey began to 'reset' due to political changes, the growth of online journalism accelerated. The Gezi Park protests were critical in this as in many others. The 'media' of the popular movement that shook the government and the country for days was largely shaped online. In the course of today, when the television channels of media monopolies have been discredited and the sale number of the 'flagships' of printed journalism have become 'there is the announced circulation and then there is the real circulation', independent journalism initiatives on the internet have opened a new path by growing every day. The emergence and strengthening of alternative channels in the search for truth was undoubtedly good. However, the tools on the road were the same as the rest of the media: Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter (which later became X), Instagram...
Global giants!
As in almost every aspect of life, from shopping to banking, tourism to technology, the main medium of journalism was the internet, especially 'Google'.
For the independent organizations as well…
We have come to use it not only to get the accurate news and commentary in accordance with the claim of 'objectivity' that is supposed to be inherent in the profession, but also to confirm 'news' circulating on social media that is not clear who made it and how. We always remember an example we experienced in this regard at Gazete Duvar. The claim of a social media 'influencer' with many followers that a dam had burst and earthquake victims would be flooded in Hatay during the Feb. 6 earthquakes was unfounded, as reported by Burcu Özkaya Günaydın, our correspondent…
***
Of course, every 'job' is important. However, it will probably be accepted that journalism, that is, the public's right to receive accurate and fast news, is different from other fields!
But is there a difference?
It seems that this is not the case. The most fundamental problem of Google and other mediums is 'transparency'. There is no clear policy on how algorithm adjustments, which directly affect which content will be visible and therefore advertising revenues, are made, how much advertising revenues are, and what kind of policy is applied to give 'shares' to media organizations. This is not unique to Turkey, it is the way it works all over the world. For example, there has been a significant decline in the revenues of individuals or organizations broadcasting on YouTube since last year. There is no reliable explanation as to why. What is known is that there have been three algorithm changes on YouTube. Facebook has been facing media lawsuits in many parts of the world for years.
Google, with an annual turnover of 305 billion dollars, has a similar situation. However, it is not only a matter of sharing advertising revenues with the media, but also of copyrighting journalistic productions such as news, articles, photographs and videos. Because when an original piece of content is taken from its original place of publication and used in different media channels, for example in ten other channels, it generates ten separate advertising revenues. However, Google, which earns ten times from the production of a journalist, columnist or photographer, is content with only giving those ten different channels a share of the advertising revenue at a rate determined by itself. However, the compensation for the news is a separate issue. There is no equivalent for it yet.
Of course, many countries in the world, including Turkey, have regulations on copyright in internet broadcasting. However, these are either insufficient to solve the problems that arise, as is the case in our country, or, as in the European Union countries, new regulations are introduced to bind the monopoly companies in question to certain rules within a system. However, there is no country that has completely solved the issue. Even in countries that have enacted copyright laws and established the institutions to operate them, we can see that these media outlets are later 'whining'. Of course, they are all 'companies' after all, and their priority is to ensure that their profitability does not decrease.
***
While the Turkish Parliament's Digital Media Commission was still working on the issue last year, which envisages the enactment of a copyright law in 2025, the algorithm change made by Google since last August, the effects of which became apparent in October, created a major change in the situation all over the world. In some countries, there were abnormal decreases in views, including in the 'mainstream media'. In Turkey, as far as we can understand, the following picture emerged:
Except for a few organizations that have become 'leaders' in online journalism from the beginning with misleading headlines, visual presentations that in many cases border on pornography, methods described as 'click journalism', and texts that do not meet what is stated in the headline, many news sites, including independent media organizations, have experienced readership declines starting from 40-50 percent and reaching up to 80-90 percent. A few of the aforementioned 'leading' organizations and some media outlets with readerships below certain figures, including independent media outlets, saw partial increases. It was not clear what these increases were based on because Google did not give any clear explanation on this issue. Rather, it was summarized as 'keep creating content the way you think you're doing it right'. What is 'right' if the medium of publication does not transparently disclose who gets readers and how? There is no answer!
In short, online journalism has been turned upside down by an 'algorithm change' that is unclear how it was created, how long it will last, whether it will be redone, and what the consequences will be if it is.
***
The Competition Board on Dec. 3 did not find an answer to the question of how the algorithm changes, which were announced to continue in the future, were made. The case in question was about Google's alleged abuse of power in the process of advertiser payments. The issue of algorithm changes was also raised by legal experts, including a representative of Gazete Duvar. However, the Google representative responded that 'it has nothing to do with the lawsuit'. Of course, such a statement can be made legally, but this attitude - and not only Google's - is common to all news publishing platforms: No clarity, no transparency, no local initiative... What the 'center' says is what the center says, and what the center says is always unclear...
***
So what will happen? The biggest and most powerful media owner in Turkey is the state. So, naturally, there is a need for 'regulation' for state-owned media organizations. It is necessary to keep this in mind when looking at the tensions with these global platforms from time to time. It is reported a legal regulation in the new year could be similar to the one in Italy: A system of free bargaining between media organizations and Google or other platforms, and a public institution to regulate and supervise this system. At this point, the Press Advertising Agency (BİK), the General Directorate of Copyrights, and the Competition Board are naturally involved. If an agreement cannot be reached within this system, then the parties will be able to apply to the judiciary. In other words, the attitude of an institution that will assume the role of regulator and supervisor on behalf of the public towards independent media (or not) is as much a question mark as which independent media organizations will be able to tolerate protracted court proceedings.
***
So what should independent media organizations do? First of all, the readers who have kept these organizations alive despite all the difficulties so far will have new duties. For example, strengthening support such as subscriptions and donations... As for the institutional side of the issue: It seems essential for independent media outlets to show their strength by acting together, and to do this, to be able to act together in order to be 'at the (negotiation) table'. As we move towards 2025, let us convey these notes for now as a 'status report'.