Although three days have gone by since I wrote my article titled "Pasha, would you rescue me if I was stranded on a mountain?" I have yet to receive a single response to my question. But I will give them the benefit of the doubt and not think they just don't care. I hope they just haven't been able to conclude their investigation into the case. Unlike the silence on that side, the discrimination against our Cihan cameraman and reporter Lütfi Akyurt has sparked public outrage from all across the country. Our phones have been ringing nonstop for the past three days. People -- some even in tears -- have been expressing their sympathy to us and their discontent with the actions of the people mentioned in my article. The situation has become a source of debate on hundreds of Web sites, with thousands of readers having sent e-mails to news agencies that published the news. While we expected some of our colleagues to show us more solidarity, the incident has received wide coverage in many newspapers and television news broadcasts.Some media companies condemned the incident, calling for an investigation. Certainly if the protests became stronger, the event could have completely led to the elimination of accreditation practices that were inherited during the Feb. 28 process. I am still hopeful.
A few underlying features of the reactions that have been expressed are:
People condemn discriminatory practices and applaud us for bringing the issue courageously into the limelight. We were congratulated for bringing such a tragic event to the attention of the public in a respectful, civil and stable way.
Among the messages we received, one said this treatment -- which should not be shown to even wild animals -- is contradictory to the words of Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ, who said "even a terrorist is a person." Some people asked why the situation was not publicized as soon as it happened and others criticized us for explaining such a situation with an "extremely soft" tone. We extend our deepest thanks to those who have expressed such concern and interest and respect each of the different views.
But one case that particularly made me happy was that no one blamed us for trying to undermine the military in any way. This showed that our intentions were not misunderstood. I was also especially happy that no one accused us of making the story up. This once again showed that both the people and the media trust us.
I have expressed some points in interviews and would like to summarize them in this column. First, when I wrote about the event in my column, my intentions were not to restart a debate on accreditation practices but, as one can tell from my article, my purpose was to emphasize that Başbuğ's positive stance towards democracy, commitment to the rule of law and respect of religious values and human rights would only prove to be beneficial if they were actually implemented.
I wanted to explain that the public opinion would not be convinced until the TSK confronted the events which it is being accused of being involved in -- such as the coup diaries and the death wells. I wanted to show that words and actions must be consistent by recalling an inhumane event that a member of our news agency was in just a few weeks ago. We are an agency that has been accredited by the people, and so we do not insist on obtaining other accreditation rights. We offer our services to all media companies, without exception. Besides, the mentality behind accreditation requirements for live news broadcasts is hard to understand. My words should not mislead anyone to think that I find accreditation practices valid, because I most certainly do not and I have not encountered anyone in our media that supports it. You can decide on who you want to invite to your home or your private business, but no government institution that operate under laws passed in Parliament and is supported with taxpayer money can use an authority not bestowed upon it by the law.
I do not know on what principles the accreditation practices are founded or what crimes some reporters have committed to deserve such treatment.
As for why we did not publicize the story when it happened, well, the reporters have been subject to such treatment for the last 12 years and found it not worth reporting. I learned about the incident a little late and when Gen. Başbuğ delivered his speech, I explained the incident, hoping to point out the major contradiction between his words and the actions of some military personnel.
We hope the treatment Akyurt was subject to will function as a catalyst in the General Staff's review of accreditation practices and make a modest contribution to our democracy.
