‘See no evil, read no evil’: the failing role of Turkish newspapers in coverage of Turkey’s 2016 coup attempt

References

• Abousnnouga, G., & Machin, D. (2010). Analysing the language of war monuments. Visual Communication, 9 (2), 131–149. doi: 10.1177/1470357210369884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amnesty International. (2017). Journalism is not a crime: Crackdown on media freedom in Turkey. Index: EUR 44/6055/2017.
   Google Scholar
• Balci, A., & Jacoby, T. (2012). Guest editors’ introduction: Debating the ergenekon counter-terrorism investigation in turkey. Middle EasternCritique, 21(2), 137–140. doi: 10.1080/19436149.2012.688584
   Google Scholar
• Bekdil, B. (2015, February 5). Erdogan’s continuing crackdown on Gulen is a message to all. Middle East Forum.
   Google Scholar
• Billig, M. (1995). Banal nationalism. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. (1994). On reporting: The representation of speech in factual and factional narratives. In M. Caldas-Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 295–309). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Canyaş, F. B., & Canyaş, O. (2016). The interplay between formal and informal institutions in Turkey: The case of the Fethullah Gülen community. Middle Eastern Studies, 52(2), 280–294. doi: 10.1080/00263206.2015.1119125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çetingüleç, T. (2014). Erdoğan karşıtı yazarlar Sözcü’de tiraj patlatıyor [Anti-Erdoğan columnists boost Sozcu’s circulation]. Al Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/tr/originals/2014/09/turkey-opposition-paper-sozcu-circulation-boost.html#
   Google Scholar
• Dearden, L. (2017). German official accuses Turkey of ‘unacceptable’ spying against Gulen supporters. The Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/germany-turkey-unacceptable-spying-merkel-erdogan-fethullah-gulen-coup-plot-july-hizmet-movement-a7653471.html
   Google Scholar
• Esen, B., & Gümüşçü, S. (2016). Rising competitive authoritarianism in Turkey. Third World Quarterly, 37(9), 1581–1606. doi: 10.1080/01436597.2015.1135732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Gürsel, K. (2016, July 22). Turkey’s failed coup reveals “army within an army”. Al Monitor.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Human Rights Watch. (2017). Human rights watch 2017 world report. Retrieved from: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/turkey
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, G. (2012). A house divided against itself: The deteriorating state of media freedom in Turkey. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute Silk Road Studies Program. Retrieved from http://www.genocidewatch.org/images/Turkey_12_Feb_6_A_house_divided_against_itself_.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kocabaşoğlu, U. (1993). The press reform, 1919–1938. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Mango, A. (1999). Atatürk: The biography of the founder of modern Turkey. London: John Murray.
   Google Scholar
• Özgüneş, N., & Terzis, G. (2000). Constraints and remedies for journalists reporting national conflict: The case of Greece and Turkey. Journalism Studies, 1(3), 405–426. doi: 10.1080/14616700050081759
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. E. (2007). Analysing newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Saran, C. (2014). Media ownership in Turkey: The changes in media ownership during AKP period. International Communication Science & Media Studies Congress Proceeding Book.
   Google Scholar
• Sümer, Ç, & Yaşlı, F. (2010). Hegemonyadan Diktoryaya AKP ve Liberal-Muhafazakar İttifak [From hegemony to dictatorship: An alliance between liberal conservatives and AKP]. Ankara: Tan Kitapevi Yayınları.
   Google Scholar
• Tunç, A. (2015). Media integrity report: Media ownership and financing in Turkey. South East European Media Observatory. Retrieved from http://mediaobservatory.net/radar/media-integrity-report-media-ownership-and-financing-turkey
   Google Scholar
• Ulu, G. (2016). Sözcü found Erdoğan. Sözcü. Retrieved from http://www.sozcu.com.tr/2016/gundem/erdogani-sozcu-buldu-1315631/
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1991). Racism and the press. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283. doi: 10.1177/0957926593004002006
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices – readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 32–70). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Three models of interdisciplinarity. In R. Wodak & P. Chilton (Eds.), A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis: Theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity (pp. 3–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118. doi: 10.1177/1461445699001001005
   Google Scholar
• Way, L., & Akan, A. (2017). Coverage of bombings for political advantage: Turkish on-line news reporting of the 2016 Ankara attacks. Social Semiotics, 27(5), 545–566. doi: 10.1080/10350330.2016.1278342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Way, L., & Kaya, E. (2015). Turkish newspapers’ role in winning votes and exasperating Turkish-Kurdish relations: The Ağrı shootings. Discourse and Communication, 10(1), 82–100. doi: 10.1177/1750481315611241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yesil, B. (2014). Press censorship in Turkey: Networks of state power, commercial pressures, and self-censorship. Communication, Culture & Critique, 7, 154–173. doi: 10.1111/cccr.12049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar