L'Université Paul Cézanne, Aix-Marseille III &
L'Institut Supérieur de l'Information et des Médias
08-09 Décembre 2011 à Aix-en-Provence
Selva Ersoz
Maltepe University,Istanbul,Turkey
Being Online in Turkey:
Inclusion and Exclusion
Between Boundaries
Outline




Internet in Turkey: The rise
Online regulations in Turkey: The restrictions
Democratic Potential of Internet
Internet dilemma: The case of Turkey
Internet in Turkey: The rise





Turkey has had public Internet access since 1993.
The first available connections were dial-up.
Cable Internet has been available since 1998 and
ADSL since 2003.
35,000,000 Internet users as of March/2011.
Internet use is highest with 55 %, in the group aged
between 16 to 24 years and decreased with the age
Internet in Turkey: The rise
Technophobia of older generation
“Using the new technology is as natural as
breathing for children”; whereas older
generations’ fear and incapacity block their
relations with internet”
(Tapscott,1998)


All the things Web 2.0 represents participation, collectivism, virtual
communities, amateurism - become
unarguably good things, things to be
nurtured and applauded, emblems of
progress toward a more enlightened state.
But is it really so? "(2005).

Internet in Turkey: The rise
Young males are typically the earliest adopters in
emerging internet markets and digital platforms.
 The strong presence of these early adopters in
Turkey – 71% of users are aged 15-34 and 58% are
male
 Turkey shares many characteristics with the most
developed internet markets like strong presence of
search and key categories, dominance of Western
super sites (Google, Facebook)

Internet in Turkey: The rise




Google ranks as number one property in Turkey with
18.3 million unique visitors.
 40% of top properties are US sites.
Facebook's position as the third ranked Web property
overall in Turkey in September 2010
 Dogan Online led a total of seven Turkish-based
properties that ranked amongst the top 15,
Including Milliyet Group, Mynet A.S. and Blogcu.com.
Internet users spend on average more than one hour
a day online, ranking it among the five most engaged
online populations worldwide.
Internet in Turkey: The rise
Online video viewing has become an
essential part of the digital consumer
experience in Turkey with 9 out of 10 internet
users consuming video content every month
 During February 2011, viewers watched
nearly 792 million videos on Facebook
 YouTube videos, with 690 million videos
Dailymotion.com ranked third with nearly 14.9
million unique viewers
 The largest Turkish platform Nokta Medya
with 43.6 million online videos


Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions

The law on the internet (or the Regulation of
Broadcasts via Internet and Prevention of
Crimes Committed Through such
Broadcasts) No. 5651 was passed by the
parliament on May 4, 2007.
 Within this law, the censorship on internet
has been designated, always referring to
existing related laws.
Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions

Within this law, the censorship on internet has been designated,
always referring to existing related laws. According to the Law:
-provocation for suicide
-sexual abuse of the children
-facilitation of the use of narcotics
-provision of substances harmful to the health
-obscenity
-prostitution
-facilitation of gambling
-crimes against Ataturk
Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions
Turkish court does not only based their decisions
about web sites blockings according to the law 5651
(articles enlisted above) but some additional law
rules have been running
 The internet law 5651 hold IPs liable for blocking
access to illegal Web content.
 The Telecommunications Authority is in charge with
classifying the actor accountable for the offensive
content.

Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions

The main reason for blocking web sites ONI report
2010 is obscenity
 Scandalous ban of YouTube in 2007
 The consequential effects of this blockage have
some side effects on Turkey.
 For example in its report on “Enemies of the
Internet,” issued last March, Reporters without
Borders added Turkey to the list of “countries
under surveillance.”
Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions
There have been around 15000 sites which are
inaccessible either as the result of a court decision
or at the initiative of the TIB by October 2011.
 Turkey has been criticized both by international
organizations like Reporters without Borders or
Turkish Press itself or lawyers and academicians.
 Turkey has been executing a selective filtering on
the political content. (ONI Report)

Online regulations in Turkey: The
restrictions



The tension got higher when TIB has explained the Use of the
Internet Safety Rules
Filter criteria are determined entirely by the TIB. Not only access
to “harmful content”, determined by TIB but also most of the
social media sites like Blogger.com or Youtube will be restricted
by this new legislation.
 TIB defended itself by saying that :
“I will not comment on the reason for introducing the subject
now in May but not in February when the decision is taken. I
think the reason for introducing it, is political, I can not
make another explanation"
Democratic Potential of Internet

At the beginning, the potential power of web
2.0 tools were not merely understood by
governments and more over there were not
censorship applications towards these new
technologies.
Democratic Potential of Internet
Optimistic discourse vs. pessimistist discourse
 Political disengagement (Althaus and Tewksbury,
1999):
 Political news has been given as if they have the
same importance with other new, because of
that the followers of political agenda on the
internet are less informed than those who follow
it from the other media.

Democratic Potential of Internet
'Dictator's dilemma
 used by Christopher Kedzie and described
the Internet as a boon to democracy
 Dictator’s dilemma occurs when commercial
and financial pressures arising from
globalization force dictators into relinquishing
their monopoly over digital communications

Democratic Potential of Internet
It is a dilemma for the dictator because
losing control of media can translate into
weakened political influence, and
increased political autonomy for citizens.
It is a dilemma for the dictator because
losing control of the media can translate
into political influence weakened and with
increased political autonomy for citizens.
(1997)

Democratic Potential of Internet
Hillary Clinton: “we who believe that
governments have erected barriers to internet
freedom - whether they're technical or filters
or censorship regimes their attacks on those
who exercise rights to expression and
assembly online - will find themselves
eventually boxed in”

Democratic Potential of Internet

Morozov: “What happened afterwards in Iran
got lost in the media coverage, with all the
media still focused on how the Green
Movement was using the Internet, but not
focused enough on how the government itself
was using the Internet” (2011).”
Internet dilemma: the case of Turkey
Foreign press and international media
organizations, which have published negative
reports about internet freedom in Turkey,
have eluded an issue in this whole process
which is really important.

Internet dilemma: the case of Turkey
The internet itself has played a leading role in
internet censorship. NGO’s, academics, bloggers
and thousands against the internet filtering have
chosen to announce their voices only on the
internet.
 It would be convenient to name these events as
‘internet dilemma’.
The circumstance which was planning to bring some
limits on the internet, thanks to the internet, has
taken a step back.


Internet dilemma: the case of Turkey

The news of the event has been spread via
internet, the topic is a discussion subject on
the forums and finally the protest event has
been carried to the streets where we have
the mobilization axe.
But…
The results of those actions have not yet
been ascertained, and by using some of the
critical scenarios, democratic potential of
Turkish internet can be discussed.
 Street protest, in opposition to what media
has reflected, has not reached to a very high
audience

Very little participation in street actions
outside of Istanbul:

“while there is little question of the internet’s
ability to quickly disseminate information,
there is a great deal of uncertainty about the
value of this information. That is, much of the
material available on the internet is often
unreliable and clearly unverifiable”
Signing the petition via the official site of the
action www.internetimedokunma.com is
sufficient
“The next generation of activists in places like
Belarus will believe that they are actually changing
something by signing petitions on Facebook and by
organizing all kinds of virtual protests, without
actually changing anything in the real world. The
government is happy to have them isolated in this
digital sandbox without ever going out into the
streets and protesting in the real world”

Not having too many participants during
internet street actions
In this case, May 15th 'Do Not Touch My
Internet' action was reached to those who
has already ready to make the action and
also to those who use the internet extensively
and therefore was not publicly generalized.

Concluding Remarks

Would the riots that took place in North Africa
and the Middle East, in other terms the socalled ‘Arab Spring’ be effective without the
use of social media or more specifically
Tweeter or Facebook?
Concluding Remarks

In the case of Turkey If social media did not
exist, there would not be any need for
internet filtering and hence there would be no
need for such actions.
Conclusion
As a result, in the light of all these events, we have
witnessed a growing discourse in the world of social
media to tell us how much it causes inclusion,
whereas looking at the example of Turkey, we have
seen the token inclusion that turned out to be an
exclusion.
 Banned social media sites in Turkey, like YouTube
and Blogger, in fact turns the inclusion into
exclusion.

Conclusion
How effective the relationship between
democracy and internet where everybody is
taking about the democratic potential of the
internet is no doubt depends on the context
and on the country and on the perception of
democracy in that country.
 Anectode from Turkey

 Merci
de votre attention
 Selva Ersoz