Western Perception and Media Coverage of Turkiye's Elections.

AuthorGiannotta, Valeria

The recent political and presidential elections in Turkiye must be considered historic, not only for the reconfirmation of the power of the AK Party and its leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who triumphantly sealed the 'Century of Turkiye,' but above all because these electoral results refute and still contradict the distorted perception of some Western circles. On the mainstream, indeed, in the weeks immediately preceding the call to the polls of May 14, 2023 various newspapers and many Western commentators more or less explicitly gave their support to the opposition, perceived and therefore described as a 'supporter of democracy' and a "due choice against Erdogan's autocratic regime." (1)

Similarly, many journalists who came to Turkiye to report on the elections and the political climate in the country have fallen into the trap of misperception and disseminating knowledge affected by a partial and politicized reading of events and dynamics, generating expectations that, by denying the facts, proved to be fallacious and biased. Even in some political circles, there was a cautious optimism towards the opposition led by Kemal Kilicdaroglu, the leader of the main opposition political party, the Republican People's Party (CHP) which, however, should be considered lukewarm wishful thinking. As communication is undoubtedly an instrument of power and influence, its pervasive capacity also depends on the lenses, i.e., criteria of interpretation that are used to read and look at the facts. Indeed, it is by supporting ideas based on personal interpretations of society and reality, often connoted on an ideological level, that bias is created.

Emotions, Ideology, and Framing

'Personal reality' mainly concerns emotions and feelings, a set of values, ideas, ideologies, and private experience. However, it often has nothing to do with an 'objective' reading of what is happening in the global world, which eventually is known through mass media information and communication, but also through social media and the internet. This means that the perception of reality we have comes from the information reaching us through the media, which was conceived just to play the role of 'mediators' between individuals and the surrounding world. In this logic, information can bring out desired emotions by talking a lot and primarily about certain issues, or by representing a specific dimension while omitting the other one and dismissing whole readings. In other words, the play of tones, emphasis, images, and the anticipation of consequences stimulate emotions and desires, thus influencing opinions in one direction or another.

One aspect of human thinking is, in fact, 'motivated reasoning,' such as the tendency to reach conclusions based on evidence that eventually corresponds to pre-existing beliefs. In other words, if some issues pose a threat to anyone's political ideology, he or she will fight them tenaciously; if instead they go in favor of his or her worldview, he or she will accept them without much objection. (2) In this sense, people resist information that challenges their beliefs, especially if it comes from opposing political factions or conflicting values. For example, in the case of the elections in Turkiye, facing with evidence that the candidate they liked in a negative way won, some showed to be even more ardent in supporting the opponents or after Erdogan's victory many called and wrote about fraud against the Turks and the state of democracy in the country. In other words, people tend to believe what they want, even at the cost of denying the evidence, especially when it is perceived as coming from the opposite political faction. Some specialized studies show that motivated reasoning is equally widespread in all political groups, and it seems to prevail among the better-informed, at least on some issues. (3)

As the current world we live in can be defined as 'post-constructivism' and 'post-truth,' in the formation of public opinion, appealing to emotions and personal ideas yields more than facts. In fact, this certainly appears more convenient as it does not require any interpretative or in-depth effort. However, empirical evidence is fundamental to structuring the political debate, especially when discussing complex and controversial social and political realities. The biggest problem, in fact, is the distorted perception of reality, especially on salient political issues. It also implies the issue of professional ethics as well as knowledge. Wrong perceptions generate partial knowledge and, therefore, ignorance. In addition to the personal and depth psychology elements, it is also appropriate to refer to the factors pushing both individuals and social groups to follow what is happening in the world. Certainly, as Lippmann himself affirms in his communication theory essays, it often happens that states, institutions, or corporations place obstacles to a full knowledge of facts. History itself continues to show the difficulty of some information apparatuses in exercising their communicative function correctly outside of propaganda. Furthermore, although we live in an...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT