https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5443-5291
![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
‘The age of sustainable development’ has been characterized by an on-going debate over how to define development and which alternative energy resources to rely upon. It is high time to rethink the news media's role in this debate due to transformations in journalism, particularly the role of the media in harnessing the sustainable energy transition. Accordingly, this paper examines the role of the news media in environmental debates over Turkey's nuclear program within the country's polarized media system. Adopting a content analysis method, the paper illuminates how selected media outlets (three mainstream and one online alternative) have framed and disseminated debates over Turkey's nuclear program. The findings reveal that the media system matters in public debates on energy, but also that the alternative media have the potential to contribute to societal debates on issues – even within a polarized media setting – by voicing unspoken ideas.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
Notes
1 Kuzemko, Keating, and Goldthau, The Global Energy Challenge, 126.
2 Verbruggen, Laes, and Lemmens, “Assessment of the Actual Sustainability,” and Pearce, “Limitations of Nuclear Power.”
3 In investigating public debates on the sustainability of Turkey's nuclear energy program, we consider ‘post-politicization’ as a political stance promoting the idea that techno-managerial expert planning should dominate public debates, thereby displacing alternative political voices such as ecology. See Swyngedouw, “Apocalypse Forever?”; Johnstone, “Planning Reform, Rescaling”; and İşeri, Günay, and Almaz, “Contending Narratives.”
4 Gitlin, The Whole World is Watching, 7.
5 Raeijmaekers and Maeseele, “Media, Pluralism and Democracy.”
6 Wagner, Grobelski and Harembski, “Is Energy Policy a Public Issue,” and Tang and Sampson, “The Interaction between Mass Media.”
7 Günay, İşeri, and Ersoy, “Alternative Media,” and Bigl, “Fracking in the German Press.”
8 Jordan, “The Governance of Sustainable Development”; Sachs, The Age of Sustainable Development, 502–5; and van Zeijl-Rozema et al., “Governance for Sustainable Development.”
9 Fuchs, “Alternative Media,” 173.
10 Bailey, Cammaert, and Carpentier, Understanding Alternative Media; Downing, Radical Media; and Lewis, Alternative Media.
11 Gillmor, “We the Media.”
12 Fuchs and Sandoval, “The Political Economy.”
13 Comedia, “The Alternative Press,” 95.
14 Fuchs and Sandoval, “The Political Economy,” 166.
15 Doğu, “Comparing Online Alternative and Mainstream.”
16 cf. Günay, İşeri, and Ersoy, “Alternative Media and the Securitization.”
17 The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) pledged to complete three nuclear power plants to foster economic growth and competitiveness, regardless of (environmental) sustainability concerns (the one at Akkuyu is already under construction by Russia's Rosatom to be completed by 2025; construction of the second, to be built by a Franco-Japanese consortium at Sinop, has been halted due to economic considerations; the third plant is supposedly to be built at İğneada). The European Parliament has called on Turkey to halt construction of the Akkuyu plant because it breaches the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in a Transboundary Context, also known as the Espoo Convention, since neither Greece nor Greek Cyprus was consulted for negotiations. See World Nuclear Association, “Nuclear Power in Turkey,” and European Parliament, “Report on the 2018 Commission.”
18 Çarkoğlu, Baruh, and Yıldırım, “Press-Party Parallelism,” and Kaya and Çakmur, “Press-Party Parallelism.”
19 Panayırcı, İşeri, and Şekercioğlu, “Political Agency of News,” and İşeri, Şekercioğlu, and Panayırcı,“The Sphere of Consensus.”
20 Esen and Gümüşçü, “Building a Competitive Authoritarian Regime,” and Çalışkan, “Toward a New Political Regime.” It is therefore unsurprising to note that Reporters Without Borders 2018 World Press Freedom Index report ranked the Turkish media at 157 out of 180 countries. This index defines the Turkish media system as in a ‘difficult situation.’ Freedom House's 2017 annual report notes that ‘Media freedom deteriorated dramatically in the aftermath of the coup attempt in July 2016.’
21 Kristiansen, “Characteristics of the Mass Media's,” 6–7.
22 Ibid., 7.
23 Panayırcı, İşeri, and Şekercioğlu, “Political Agency of News”; İşeri, Şekercioğlu, and Panayırcı,“The Sphere of Consensus”; Çarkoğlu, Baruh, and Yıldırım, “Press-Party Parallelism”; Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems: Three Models; Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems Beyond; and Seymour-Ure, The Political Impact.
24 Gurevitch and Levy, Mass Communication Review Yearbook 5, 19.
25 Gamson and Modigliani, “Media Discourse and Public Opinion”; Nelson and Oxley, “Issue Framing Effects”; Nisbet, “Communicating Climate Change”; Sampei and Aoyagi-Usui, “Mass-Media Coverage”; Van Spanje and de Vreese, “Europhile Media”; Haller, “The Socioeconomic Effects”; Burscher et al., “Frames Beyond Words”; Delshad and Raymond, “Media Framing”: and Soroka, “Media, Public Opinion.”
26 Takahashi and Meisner, “Environmental Discourses and Discourse.”
27 Norris, “The Watchdog Role.”
28 Ibid.
29 D’Angelo, “News Framing as,” 880.
30 Gitlin, The Whole World, 7.
31 Entman, “Framing: Towards Clarification,” 51–2.
32 Gamson and Modigliani, “Media Discourse and Public Opinion,” 3.
33 Burscher, Vliegenthart, and Vreese, “Frames Beyond Words”; Nisbet, “Communicating Climate Change”; and Gamson and Modigliani, “Media Discourse and Public Opinion.”
34 Beck, Risk Society, 22–3.
35 Cottle, “‘Risk Society’ and the Media,” 8.
36 Beck, Ecological Politics.
37 Cottle, “‘Risk Society’ and the Media,” 8; Becker, “Whose Side Are We On?”, and Schlesinger, “Rethinking the Sociology of Journalism.”
38 Beck, “Critical Theory of World.”
39 Boström et al., A Reflexive Look.
40 Nisbet, “Communicating Climate Change,” 16.
41 Baresch, Hsu, and Reese, “The Power of Framing,” 637–8.
42 Gamson and Modigliani, “Media Discourse and Public Opinion.”
43 Nisbet, “Communicating Climate Change,” 16.
44 Beck, Risk Society.
45 Ibid., 22.
46 Ibid., 22–3.
47 Quoted in Painter, Climate Change in the Media, 7.
48 Pollack, Uncertain Science … Uncertain World, 6.
49 Beck, Ecological Politics, 101.
50 Aram, Nivas, and Ramya, “Newspaper Framing,” 31.
51 Abe, “Risk Assessment of Nuclear Power.”
52 Kristiansen, “Characteristics of the Mass Media's,” 4–5.
53 Ho, “Communicating about Nuclear Energy.”
54 Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems: Three Models.
55 Medyatava's 16 April-22 April 2019 newspaper circulation numbers, https://www.medyatava.com/tiraj/2018-04-16
56 Yeşil, Media in New Turkey, 5.
57 Düzgit, “The Islamist-Secularist Divide,” 18.
58 Ersoy, “War-Peace Journalism.”
59 Sözeri and Güney, The Political Economy.
60 Schreier, Qualitative Content Analysis.
61 Siegrist and Visschers, “Acceptance of Nuclear Power”; Thomas, “What Will the Fukushima”; Wittneben, “The Impact of the Fukushima”; and Goodfellow, Williams and Azapagic, “Nuclear Renaissance.”
62 At the time of our analysis, Hürriyet, Sözcü, and Sabah were ranked first, second, and third, respectively, circulation-wise. Circulation data are from www.medyatava.com
63 Panayırcı, İşeri, and Şekercioğlu, “Political Agency of News,” and İşeri, Şekercioğlu, and Panayırcı,“The Sphere of Consensus.”
64 KONDA, “Kitle Iletişim Araçlarının Etkisi,” 15.
65 Reuters Institute Digital News Report, “Turkey.”
66 SCF, “Freedom of Press in Turkey”; Yeşil, Media in New Turkey; and Sözeri, Türkiye’de Medya-İktidar.
67 Taylan, Alternatif Medya.
68 Cohen, “A Coefficient of Agreement.”
69 Miles and Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis.
70 Painter, Climate Change in the Media.
71 Schmidt, Horta, and Pereira, “The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster.”
72 Boykoff and Boykoff, “Climate Change.”
73 Way and Kaya, “Turkish Newspapers’ Role.”
74 Arcan, “Ethnic Conflicts.”
75 Esen and Gumuscu, “Building a Competitive Authoritarian Regime.”
76 Swyngedouw, “Apocalypse Forever?”
77 Somer, “Turkey: The Slippery Slope.”
78 Yeldan and Voyvoda, Low Carbon Development.
79 Oltra et al., “Media Coverage of Nuclear.”
80 Zukas, “No Conflict, No Coverage.”
81 Culley et al., “Media Framing of Proposed.”
82 Wang, Li, and Li, “Media Coverage.”
83 Kristiansen, “Characteristics of the Mass Media's,” 4–5.
84 Ibid., 3.
85 Wang, Li, and Li, “Media Coverage.”
86 Fuchs, “Alternative Media.”
87 See among other sources Günay, İşeri, and Ersoy, “Alternative Media and the Securitization”; Harcup, Alternative Journalism, Alternative Voices; Atton, “Why Alternative Journalism Matters”; and Kim and Hamilton, “Capitulation to Capital?”
88 Harcup, “‘The Unspoken – Said’.”
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Metin Ersoy
Metin Ersoy earned his BA, MA and Ph.D. degrees from Eastern Mediterranean University in Famagusta, North Cyprus. He is currently an Associate Professor of New Media and Journalism in the Faculty of Communication and Media Studies of Eastern Mediterranean University. Since 2012, he has served as Secretary of the European Peace Research Association. His research interests include Peace Journalism, Cypriot Media, News Framing and Coverage, Public Opinion, Agenda Setting and Conflict Resolution.
Emre İşeri
Emre İşeri is currently a member of the Department of International Relations at Yaşar University in İzmir. His research interests include energy policy, political communication, Eurasian politics and Turkish foreign policy. He has published articles and chapters in numerous books and journals, including Geopolitics, Journal of Balkan and Near East Studies, Energy Policy, Turkish Studies, Security Journal, South European Society and Politics, European Journal of Communication, and Environment and Planning C.