A “disinformation law” that, if passed, would impose up to three-year jail sentences for the spread of “fake news” or “disinformation,” has been sitting in Turkish parliament for years.
While the bill itself makes no attempt to define fake news or false information, independent journalists in the country speculate the so-called “disinformation” law may be a euphemism. In fact, the law could be a way of securing authoritarian control in the country by giving outsized power to censor and restrict information flow to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s government. Fact-checkers at Teyit, one of two Turkish verified signatories to the International Fact-Checking Network’s code of principles, compared the legislation to the laws of regimes that lack press freedoms, like Burkina Faso, Russia, Cambodia and Myanmar.
“All examples so far show that such restrictive laws on misinformation limit freedom of expression and are used for censorship,” reads a letter from Teyit sent to a group of signatories to the International Fact-Checking Network’s code of principles. “These countries, where those who spread ‘fake news’ are imprisoned, are on the lower spectrum of both the freedom of expression and the freedom of the press and media literacy rankings show that they are not resistant to false information.”
Can Semercioğlu, head of communications at Teyit, said, “If this bill becomes a law, people who spread false information may face imprisonment of one to three years. Other administrative measures include sanctions such as fines, bans on advertising, and bandwidth throttling for social media platforms.”
Although most people in Turkey have at least heard of the bill, many are not yet aware of its details, Semercioğlu said. Further, public opinion in Turkey is already divided on media at large due to media ownership issues in the country.
“Despite the media market being liberalized on paper, due to political, economic and regulatory factors, it remains highly concentrated, with no real ownership controls in place,” writes Hüseyin Kemal Bayazit in “Media Ownership and Concentration in Turkey,” a 2016 book summarizing the matter. “Turkish media markets are dominated by a handful of vertically integrated industrial conglomerates.”
Semercioğlu said prominent journalists, journalism advocates, unions and legal experts have argued the bill has the potential to “narrow freedom of speech and increase censorship,” though he stipulated that the viewpoints of both advocates and detractors of the bill are represented on Turkish social media.
“The bill offers an ambiguous definition of disinformation, ‘fake news,’ etc. This may cause arbitrary decisions and it may easily become an instrument of censorship,” Semercioğlu said. “If this bill passes in the parliament, it will heavily undermine the solution-oriented processes that fact-checkers, media organizations and academics have proposed for a long time.”
Semercioğlu also said that the more restrictions a country places on freedom of expression, the more vulnerable its populace becomes to false information.
“Misinformation is a significant issue; however, dozens of examples of countries like Russia, China, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Tanzania, Taiwan, Thailand, Kenya, Myanmar, Singapore and Malaysia show us that the solution is not imprisonment,” he said. Semercioğlu pointed to lower press freedom and media literacy rankings in the countries, despite their apparent legal opposition to “false information.”
In March, Russia passed a similar “fake news” law cracking down on independent news outlets reporting on the Russia-Ukraine war. The legislation punishes, through fines and 15-year prison sentences, those who spread information Russian authorities deem to be false. The Philippine government has also attempted to pass similar “anti-fake news” measures, though Filipino fact-checkers have opposed the moves.
“The No. 1 source of disinformation here is the government,” said Ellen Tordesillas, head of VERA Files, a Philippine-based independent fact-checking outlet. “Legislators should first review existing laws and see if they are adequate to check on the failings and abuses of media and falsehoods being spread in social media. We already have our laws on libel, cybercrime law and anti-terror.”
However, unlike in Turkey, fact-checkers in the Philippines said that they were invited to legislative hearings to offer input regarding the laws.
“We fact-checkers frequently repeat that we need a holistic approach to tackle the misinformation problem: empowering all the stakeholders with critical digital literacy skills,” Semercioğlu said. “These skills aim to access the facts firsthand and prevent the spread of misinformation rather than punish those who spread it.”
The Turkish directorate of communications did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the International Fact-Checking Network.
“Even though fact-checkers have lots of information and experience in misinformation and disinformation problems, we have never been a part of the process. We haven’t been asked any questions; no information has been requested,” Semercioğlu said.
|