There couldn't be a better expression of the situation in which Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan finds himself as a consequence of the war of words he has declared on Mr. Aydın Doğan, the media tycoon who owns roughly half of the Turkish media. In the latest escalation of that war Erdoğan called on his party members not to purchase newspapers published by the Doğan group, the first time a Turkish prime minister has called for a boycott of part of the media.It was obvious that Erdoğan's call would spark strong reactions from both the opposition parties and the Doğan Media Group. It was not at all surprising, for instance, that the chairman of the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) declared that Erdoğan would not even hesitate to ban these papers if it was in his power to do so. It was a little bit surprising, though, that a leading member of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), an ultranationalist party which is widely suspected of harboring fascist leanings, came out and said: "The prime minister who says he has shed the National Vision [read Islamist] shirt, now wears the black shirt. He has made it clear that he yearns for a fascist political order." The Radikal daily, which claims to be the most serious of Doğan papers, left the impression that it was giving a rather disproportionate response when the headline across its front page on Saturday read "Footsteps of fascism," and almost the entire front page carried the photograph of Nazis starting their campaign on May 10, 1933, in Berlin to burn books of which they disapproved.
Reactions by his opponents might have been vastly exaggerated, but the consequences of Erdoğan's boycott call antagonized even people other than his political enemies. It not only helped to unite all opinion writers of the Doğan group (even those who have been fair toward him) against him, but also raised the objections and protests of journalists who have so far tried to pursue a balanced and objective assessment of his policies and who are fully aware that the Doğan group has for both ideological and commercial reasons pursued highly unfair and imbalanced coverage of Erdoğan and the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government he leads.
Erdoğan's call for a boycott of Doğan papers surely cannot be justified on rational grounds. It has triggered the emergence of various irrational and conspiracy theories, some of which are as follows: 1) Erdoğan lost his temper because he is worried that the Deniz Feneri (Lighthouse) fraud scandal in Germany involving some people with ties to him will eventually implicate him. (This is, of course, the theory implied by the Doğan papers.) 2) Erdoğan wants to exploit the widespread antipathy among the people against Aydın Doğan. (This is, of course, the theory put forward by ardent Erdoğan sympathizers.) 3) Disclosure of the Deniz Feneri fraud scandal is actually the revenge of Chancellor Angela Merkel on Erdoğan, who upset her when he called on Turks in Germany to "integrate but not assimilate." (This wildest of conspiracy theories was related to me by otherwise very reliable sources.) 4) The Deniz Feneri fraud scandal is a plot by the deep state, which wants to get at Erdoğan, who somehow managed to escape the closure case. (This theory is put forward by those who closely follow the dealings of retired chief prosecutors.) 5) The "It''s Ramadan, stupid" theory: Erdoğan lost his temper because fasting is straining him.
I buy none of these and instead have a very simple and rational theory to explain Prime Minister Erdoğan's irrational behavior. Even undergraduate students who have taken my courses on political communication at Bahçeşehir University in İstanbul know very well that in contemporary democracies politicians spend a lot of money and employ a large number of public relations advisors, spin-doctors, minders, etc., in order to pursue effective political public relations. Mr. Erdoğan seems to be completely lacking competent political communications experts to advise him on this extremely important matter. Mr. Erdoğan needs to be aware that in the media age even an otherwise highly successful politician may be perceived as a failure if he fails in public relations.