Gülen Coverage and Lies of Omission

https://theworld.org/segments/2024/10/21/turkish-cleric-accused-of-orchestrating-a-coup-attempt-dies-in-pennsylvania

I caught this story the other day on PRX's The World. It more or less typifies what's wrong with shows like this. Twenty-five years ago I was excited to have access to this show as international news was hard to get. The show frequently carries interesting stories but there's a terrible pro-Western bias in all its coverage and this story was no exception.

Fethullah Gülen's place in Turkish politics and his relationship with Erdogan is explained in the broad strokes, but the glaring hole in the story is the fact that the 2016 coup attempt was also connected to Incirlik Air Base near Adana. It's a joint base with a Turkish presence in addition to several thousand US forces, an air wing, and dozens of nuclear bombs. Previous coup attempts - also connected to the United States have always relied on the Turkish military. The fact that Incirlik jets were involved speaks volumes in addition to Washington's refusal to extradite Gülen. Clearly he was an important US asset for many years.

After the failed coup Gülen's stock dropped significantly and his networks in Türkiye and Central Asia seemed to be largely shattered. He still gained significant income from US charter schools and even in the years after the coup there were reports of paramilitary operations taking place on his compound in the Poconos.

The World story failed to mention any connection to the United States and Turkish coups past or present. They simply follow the US State Department line almost verbatim at times. In fact in many of their international stories they just rely on the statements of US officials - without even giving voice to the other side. It's an Establishment-safe show in every way.

This marks the difference between so-called 'liberal' bias and that of 'conservative' or more properly Right-wing news. Given that so-called liberal outlets defend and preserve the interests of American power (the State Department, Wall Street, and the Pentagon) they cannot be called liberal - not the way the Right means it. It's simply Establishment or mainstream, with a left-leaning bias when it comes to civil rights issues and identity politics. They lie (as is the case here) by means of framing and omission. Leaving out critical elements and utilizing some gentle spin the story can take on a very different tone. It's a lie of sorts but not overtly so.

Right-wing outlets will often just tell outright lies, utilize rumours and engage in speculation. And by means of echo chambers and feedback loops they generate and manufacture their own controversies which are often built on deliberate use of mis- or disinformation. It's certainly pernicious and destructive and sadly even when they might stumble on to something true, they've completely destroyed any credibility they might have claimed.

Ultimately both Mainstream and Right-wing outlets are of limited value. I will utilize the former to a limited extent but I find the latter to be of little or no value.

Alternative and international media are a must for anyone who wants to understand the news, but even this will be of limited value if one doesn't read history for context. If you want to understand Gülen, then one needs to read about US-Turkish relations throughout the Cold War and US plans for Eurasia with the fall of the Soviet Union. It's a long and complicated story but if you don't know it, then the kind of fluff coverage represented by this World piece will seem thorough, credible, and accurate. The same is true of Right-wing media outlets and their coverage of something like the Israel-Gaza War. Sadly on that score The World is no better.