After the adoption of the Law "On Media", its implementation began.

According to the law, media entities must enter the Media Register to continue their activities.

Is a media registry mandatory?

According to the current law, it is possible to become a content creator and broadcaster without entering the media register.

However, this content should not be aimed at mass production of information belonging to different sources and mass information dissemination.

Because the law has established existing standards and requirements for the dissemination of mass information.

One of these requirements is the importance of the subject claiming the name of the media to be in the media register.

According to the authority given by the law, the executive power body (in the current case, the Media Agency) has the right to apply to the court and file a claim for legal action regarding the mass media broadcaster that is not included in the register.

According to the latest information, up to 200 media subjects have already entered the media register.

However, there are subjects who have been denied access to the media register.

Of course, as the number of those who decide to refuse increases, those who are dissatisfied will also increase.

This will increase discussions and debates on social media as well as on the legal level.

Who are dissatisfied with the media law?

Dissatisfied with the law, more precisely, with the media register required by the law, can be divided into 3 groups:

  • Subjects refused to be included in the media rating

  • Those who do not appeal, who protest the law with political motives

  • Those who receive a negative response to their application to the register as an individual journalist

  • Subjects who have been refused inclusion in the media register are mostly (there are those who were refused for different reasons) those who want to demand more bribes, abuse the name of journalists and media, and take advantage of this immunity.

    Those who belong to this group do not engage in actual journalistic activity, most of them receive monthly funds by blackmailing middle and small officials and businessmen in districts and villages, and cover the problems of the complainants for a specific amount.

    These subjects usually have an "editorial staff" consisting of one person or two or three members of the same family.

    They mostly carry out the order of one official against another official, and participate in the flow of dirty information.

    The "exclusive information" of this type of subjects is mostly "reliable source" information leaked by interest groups.

    Among them, there are enough people who spread false and manipulative information, which some neighboring countries use according to their plans.

    In most cases, this type of subjects used for fake news is used as a tool for circulating information and then manipulating it in a wider area.

    However, among those who are denied inclusion in the media register, there are those who do not have enough resources to create 20 original contents required by the law, who do not have a higher education of their head, or who do not meet other requirements.

    The Media Agency reports that each of the subjects whose inclusion in the register was refused was informed about the individual reason justifying the decision.

    The second group that protested the law is more politicized, referring to international conventions, documents related to democracy, media freedom and human rights (it is easy to show that there are many manipulations in the references).

    It is interesting that this group is supported more by those who are represented in the first group.

    And then the question arises.

    What do international conventions say?

    Is it media freedom to create information pollution, blackmail other media organizations with similar logos and names and demand money?

    And the most important question, two polar opposites,

    Poles serving completely different INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL interest could unite around what single interest?

    After all, only two weeks ago, none of those who threatened the Media Agency with action referred to "free media and international conventions"?

    How did those who refer to international legal acts join those who make three mistakes when writing their name?

    Which journalists were rejected from the media register?

    First of all, it should be noted that the presence of journalists in the media register is a voluntary choice.

    Not being in the media register does not impose restrictions on the activity of a journalist.

    This is clearly written in the law.

    It's just that certain concessions and immunities are offered to those who have entered the media register and whose activity is journalism.

    Naturally, a journalist who is not in the media register will not be able to take advantage of these benefits.

    Because the executive authority does not recognize him as a journalist.

    "Journalist is free and no privileges should be applied to him.

    Those who live with the dogma that a journalist should not refuse the privileges offered to him (tax relief, preferential mortgage conditions, etc.),

    or what are those who pretend to be worried about?

    They don't want the concessions offered to journalists, and they don't think it's right to take advantage of them.

    No one prevents their journalistic activities, there is no problem in continuing their activities without being in the register.

    As this is their free choice, is it the right of those who make this choice to be on the register and take advantage of the preferential conditions offered by the state to other groups?

    No, if it is a question of "I don't want it, put it in my side pocket" as a "free media devotee" and a desire to take advantage of concessions, then this period is already over.

    The state has adopted a law and the law is currently being implemented.

    What is not to understand here?

    Is it the right of those who make this choice to be in the register and take advantage of the preferential conditions offered by the state to other categories?

    No, if it is a question of "I don't want it, put it in my side pocket" as a "free media devotee" and a desire to take advantage of concessions, then this period is already over.

    The state has adopted a law and the law is currently being implemented.

    What is not to understand here?

    Is it the right of those who make this choice to be in the register and take advantage of the preferential conditions offered by the state to other categories?

    No, if it's a question of "I don't want it, put it in my side pocket" as a "sacrifice of free media" and a desire to take advantage of concessions, then this period is already over.

    The state has adopted a law and the law is currently being implemented.

    What is not to understand here?

    "It is free to engage in blogging, vlogging, social media activism as an unauthorized activity, and it is also free to act as a journalist without being registered.

    In fact, a journalist of a media subject who has less than 3 years of experience entering the register will not be able to enter the register.

    According to the logic of the protestors, he is not a journalist or will not engage in journalistic activities?

    After all, there is no such provision in the law, and this is absurd.

    The purpose of the register is to determine the list of media and journalists, to apply discounts to it in the future and to create a cadastre that is referred to when allocating certain loans and development projects for the development of the field.

    On what basis and how should the development strategy of the area without register, definition, type of activity and activity area be prepared?

    The concession offer to the media subject and journalist,

    The second group of journalists who are not included in the Merdia register are those who have been exploited for many years.

    This issue is a serious concern and it is not the fault of the journalist who is now a victim.

    Due to the lack of any cadastre, the work of many people, including well-known journalists, was exploited, they were not listed as full-time employees in any state register, they were employed without a contract.

    Most of them either do not have a work book or it is written falsely.

    The registry did not create this problem.

    The register reveals the existing problem and stimulates the prevention of such problems in the future.

    Now the journalist is demanding the hiring of the head of the media subject and the conclusion of a contract with him.

    This not only ensures that the journalist is in the media register, but also his future activity, work experience,

    solves pension and insurance problems.

    In such a case, a question arises.

    Why should a journalist who understands, understands and is aware of the issue oppose being on the register?

    Reason?

    Of course, the protestors are either not interested in working as journalists or do not meet the requirements of the media law.

    There is also a group of journalists whose right to work has been trampled, who have been working for 10-15 years, but their activities have not been formalized by a contract, and now they are being rejected for reasons beyond their control.

    The solution to this is not to oppose the media register, but to restore the nullified right to work in court.

    Because the media server exports data from a single labor base.

    If that information is not in that database, even if 50 protest statuses are written tomorrow regarding the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Population, these people's right to pension will not be recognized.

    Likewise, insurance and other rights.

    So, analysis and some quiet reflection, “About the Media”!

    It shows that many of those who participate in the debates about the application of the law still act with their lack of argument and ignorance.