The role of Turkish media in forming public opinion about the Second Karabakh war in Turkey (Turkiye)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Baku state university

Ibrahimova Parvana Yahya,

candidate of political sciences, associate professor, doctoral student at the department of international journalism and information policy

Baku

Abstract

war turkish historical karabakh

It is mentioned in the article that the coverage of the conflict, which has entered a new stage with the beginning of the Second Karabakh War, in the Turkish media and the great influence of the media in shaping public opinion. The Nagorno-Karabakh problem is also examined down from the historical aspect in the article, various studies and theories related to the effects of the media in shaping public opinion are analyzed, at the same time, the fact that the factor of realization of modern wars in the field of information exchange is kept in focus. In addition, the forms of the topic kept on the agenda in different media platforms of Turkey until the beginning and end of the Second Karabakh War are evaluated with different criteria, the importance of the media in the direction of receiving the support of the Turkish people is emphasized. Although the application of war journalism is difficult, it is one of the important branches ofjournalism in terms of delivering the right information. The wars that have occurred are often between two countries that accuse each other the parties are trying to use the power of the media to justify themselves and get support from the international community. At that time, the duty of the journalist in the region is to report the events in an impartial, accurate and correct manner by following the principles of journalism, and to play an active role in the formation of public opinion. It is no coincidence that it happened during the Second World War that the media was discovered to have the potential to lead the masses and use it as a a means of propaganda. When newspapers with different ideologies and information policies were analyzed in the Turkish public, it was observed that the media organizations, which can be characterized as opposition, government, or independent, continuously followed the processes from the beginning to the end of the war and shared the events in the region with the Turkish public. Media subjects published news about the war mainly on the front page and in the main headline, and this factor formed the conclusion that the event was perceived by the public as an important nuance from the point of view of the theory of agenda setting.

Key words: Second Karabakh war, public opinion, Turkish media.

Анотація

Роль турецьких ЗМІ у формуванні громадської думки про Другу Карабахську війну в Туреччині (Turkiye)

Ібрагімова Парвана Яхья

кандидат політичних наук, доцент, докторант кафедри міжнародної журналістики та інформаційної політики Бакинського Державного університету, Баку

У статті йдеться про висвітлення конфлікту, який увійшов у новий етап із початком Другої Карабаської війни, у турецьких ЗМІ та великий вплив ЗМІ на формування громадської думки. У статті також розглядається проблема Нагірного Карабаху з історичного аспекту, аналізуються різноманітні дослідження та теорії, пов'язані з впливом ЗМІ на формування громадської думки, в той же час той факт, що фактор реалізації сучасних війн у сфері обміну інформацією залишається в центрі уваги. Крім того, форми теми, яка залишалася на порядку денному на різних медіа-платформах Туреччини до початку та кінця Другої Карабаської війни, оцінюються за різними критеріями, важливість ЗМі в напрямку отримання підтримки турецького народу підкреслюється. Хоча застосування військової журналістики є складним, це одна з важливих галузей журналістики з точки зору надання правильної інформації. Війни, які відбуваються, часто відбуваються між двома країнами, які звинувачують одна одну, сторони намагаються використати владу ЗМІ, щоб виправдатися та отримати підтримку міжнародної спільноти. Тоді обов'язок журналіста в регіоні - неупереджено, точно і коректно, дотримуючись принципів журналістики, висвітлювати події, брати активну участь у формуванні громадської думки. Не випадково саме під час Другої світової війни виявилося, що медіа мають потенціал вести за собою маси та використовувати їх як засіб пропаганди. Коли турецька громадськість аналізувала газети з різною ідеологією та інформаційною політикою, було помічено, що медіаорганізації, які можна охарактеризувати як опозиційні, урядові чи незалежні, постійно стежили за процесами від початку до кінця війни та ділилися події в регіоні з турецькою громадськістю. Новини про війну суб'єкти ЗМІ публікували переважно на першій шпальті та в головному заголовку, і це сформувало висновок про те, що подія сприймалася суспільством як важливий нюанс з точки зору теорії визначення порядку денного.

Ключові слова: Друга карабаська війна, громадська думка, турецькі ЗМІ.

Main part

Introduction to the problem. A brief excursion into the history of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. The Cold War, which ended with the collapse of the USSR, increased the multifaceted cooperation potential of the South Caucasus, which is of strategic importance in terms of geographical, economic and geopolitical position, and led to the strengthening of the region's reputation. Nagorno-Karabakh, which is a part of the South Caucasus and makes up a part of its territory of about 4.4 thousand square kilometers, has always been in the center of attention of countries interested in the region with its material and spiritual resources. In order to keep these territories under control and to use them for their own purposes in the future, various political decisions were made and implemented by the imperialist countries in different periods of history. The resettlement policy of the Russian Empire, which caused a fundamental change in the demographic structure of the population in Nagorno-Karabakh, was also of this type.

Nagorno-Karabakh emerged as a problem in the late 80s of the last century together with the illegal actions of Armenians. Armenians living in Armenia and Karabakh claim that these territories are their lands, by claiming that the Armenian population is large in the area and they addressed an official appeal to Moscow for its integration into Soviet Armenia. After the refusal of the Central Committee of the USSR, a physical conflict began between Azerbaijanis and Armenians [10, 22]. According to historical facts, the Armenian population was transferred to the territory of Karabakh by the government of Tsarist Russia, which was enslaving the countries that wanted to gain independence and develop by making peoples and nations hostile to each other. Czarist Russia, which is conducting the policy the «divide and rule» policy, has used Armenians throughout history to make Azerbaijan dependent on itself and to continue its policy of aggression. With the Treaty of Turkmenchay signed in 1828, Armenians were massively brought from Iran and settled in Karabakh by the Treaty of Edirne signed in 1829 from the territory of the Ottoman Empire [5, 17]. Although different figures are presented in some sources, at that time, mainly, 78.3% of the population composition of Karabakh was Turkish-Muslim, and 21.7% was Armenian. Between 1828 and 1840, more than 130,000 Armenians were moved from Iran and Ottoman territories to Northern Azerbaijan, including Karabakh. The Treaty of Turkmenchay created the opportunity for the peoples living in the Iranian and Russian lands to migrate freely to any place they want. Even Russia decided to exempt Armenians living in Iran from taxes for 20 years in order to encourage them to emigrate [12, 27].

All these processes did not end only with resettlement. Armenians who wanted to create «Greater Armenia» carried out tragic massacres in 1905 and 1918-20 with the aim of reducing the number of the local population, that is, Turko - Muslims, establishing their hegemony, and thanks to the support they received from the Russians. In the first genocide, which began in February 1905 and lasted for up to 2 years, hundreds of Azerbaijanis were killed in three days in Baku alone. In 1918, according to the newspaper «Bakinsky Rabochi», as a result of the genocide that took place in Baku, Shamakhi, Ganja, Karabakh, Iravan and Zangezur, 17,000 Turkish - Muslims were killed in Baku in March-April alone [1, 71].

There are many historical documents and facts confirming that the lands of Karabakh are the territory of Azerbaijan. The Khanate of Iravan was besieged by the Russians in 1827 and the Russian writers who were there noted that mosque minarets were visible from the Iravan fortress and that they observed that most of the population were Turks after the fortress was taken [12, 13].

Armenia grossly violated international legal norms and the principles of the UN Charter, as a continuation of the hypocritically planned, systematically and consistently implemented policy for many years, it made groundless territorial claims against Azerbaijan and started an undeclared war at the end of the 80s of the XX century. As a result of the military aggression of Armenia in 1988-1992, the Nagorno-Karabakh territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan and 7 administrative districts around it were occupied. 4.4 thousand square kilometers of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh: With the occupation of Shusha, Khankendi, Khojaly, Askaran, Khojavand, Aghdara, Hadrut regions, and Lachin region with an area of 1875 sq km on May 18, 1992, Nagorno-Karabakh was actually annexed to Armenia. As a result of the loss of Lachin, Kalbajar, Aghdam, Jabrayil, Fuzuli, Gubadli and Zangilan districts occupied by the Armenian armed forces, 20 percent of the territory of Azerbaijan was lost when the 161 km section of the Azerbaijan-Iran border was taken over by Armenia and the number of refugees and internally displaced persons in the republic exceeded 1 million people. In the early stages of the war, IDPs were forced to live in tent cities with difficult conditions. Difficult economic conditions, problems in adapting to new climate conditions, unemployment and closure of educational institutions have also created serious problems in this field [7, 123].

Although the occupying Armenia is shown as the winner of the First Karabakh War, in fact, the collapse has begun inside the country. The complete severance of relations with Azerbaijan, the closing of the border with Turkey and the not so good neighborly relations with Georgia have made Iran and Russia the only door of hope for Armenia. The unemployment level is increasing day by day, the exclusion of many economically important projects in the region due to the occupation policy has led to the spread of the domestic crisis.

During the period from the First Karabakh War to the Second Karabakh War, Azerbaijan presented the occupation of territories with facts and evidence at all high-level events, at the highest chairs of the world, at international and regional organizations, bilateral and multilateral meetings. In fact, although this is a truth known to the whole world, the dual approach to the conflict resulted in its resolution not being settled for a long time. The activity of the established international mediators created to resolve the conflict issue between the countries ended in failure, no positive results were achieved. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which has not been resolved within the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group, entered the next stage on September 27, 2020. On the mentioned date, the attack of the Armenian armed forces resulted in the start of large-scale military operations between the parties and Azerbaijan won an unequivocal victory not only in the military field, but also in the diplomatic arena and in the information war in the 44-day Patriotic War. The President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev's interviews with the world's main information resources and giant media corporations, showing restraint and patience to questions that sometimes reflect a biased, one-sided position, and with his answers based on historical facts and evidence, once again demonstrated the true voice of our country to the whole world.

In contrast to the first Karabakh war, the Azerbaijani army, which was in a superior position in terms of infrastructure, caused the other side to face heavy losses both in terms of personnel and military equipment and ammunition. During the 44-day ongoing war, the launching of missile strikes by the Armenian forces on the cities of Barda and Ganja with prohibited weapons from the air resulted in the injury and death of many civilians. The war, which ended on November 10, 2020 with the signing of a tripartite declaration by Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia, was an important step towards the restoration of historical justice in the region.

The role of the media in the formation of public opinion

Although the media has undergone various changes in terms of form and content along with the development of communication tools, it still tries to protect its main functions in democratic regimes which it must perform. The fact that the American scientist and journalist Lipman, who carried out serious research in the field of communication at the beginning of the 20th century, called newspapers, which were one of the main mass media of that time, «the Bible of democracy» is one of the main factors that show the importance of the media. On the one hand, the media performs the task of delivering political messages freely and correctly to the masses, and on the other hand, it undertakes the task of increasing the interest of the masses in the political elite, revealing the opinions, thoughts, savings and activities of the public. In modern societies, the media, in addition to conveying information to the people about the governance structure and policies of the government, also fulfills the characteristic of being the «fourth power» within the control mechanism. In times of crisis, the media also plays the role of an active mediator in alerting the masses quickly, comforting individuals and ensuring that they use their free time efficiently.

The principles that the media should have and the functions it should perform are not always applicable. In some cases, the media is used as propaganda by certain groups or political regimes and is turned into an ideological propaganda tool. Because the media has a great impact in the direction of changing people' s attitudes and behaviors. In fact, many studies have been conducted and various theories have been proposed about how media affects people. It was not possible to reach a common denominator in some points in the ongoing research. McQuail, an English communication theorist and the author of the world-famous book «Mass Information Theories», divided these studies that conducted into three stages as a return to strong, limited and strong effects from the perspective of media effects. In the first period, covering the years 1910-40, the «magic bullet» and «hypodermic needle» theories about the effects of mass media were put forward. According to this thesis, the audience is in a completely passive position in front of the media and accepts all incoming information without any resistance or analysis. In the studies conducted in the 1940s and 1960s, claims were started to be out forward that the media does not have a special influence. According to the researchers, the media did not have a significant impact on its own as just one of the other means of influencing human thought. Here the audience was seen as active rather than passive. Because the choice of which type of information to receive from which media was dependent on the audience's own desire. In the studies after the 60s, there was a return to the idea that the media has a strong influence. Within the framework of theories such as the cloak of silence - agenda setting, it has been argued that the media began to be the main tool that influences and directs the thoughts of the audience [8, 453-460]. According to agenda setting theory, the media tells people not the importance of what to think about, tells the importance of how to think. According to this theory, the more a topic is repeated in the media, the more it attracts the attention of the public and occupies a special place in its mind. Here, it is not how an event is presented, but the media's attention to that event and the attitude of individuals to the news that is important. Here, it is not how an event is presented, but the media's attention to that event and the attitude of individuals to the news that is important. The order and repetition of the news have an impact on the minds of the masses regarding its importance. This theory is taken as the basis for the formation of public opinion.

Let's look at the concept of public opinion separately. The word «public» means a group, a collective, a collective made up of individuals who are interested in certain problems, and the people in that group discuss the problems they face among themselves and propose different solutions. «Opinion» is generally used in the sense of savings. People come to a common denominator about it by having discussions around a certain topic [11, 131]. It is possible to say that there are mainly two approaches exist in the research on the formation of public opinion. The first of these is the idea that the media is a mirror or a reflection of public opinion. According to other views, the media is a regulator and even a direct creator of public opinion. In fact, it would be wrong to emphasize that there are sharp boundaries between these two ideas. Because in democratic regimes, public opinion is formed freely, while in authoritarian regimes, many means influence this stage.

Turkish researcher Arsev Bekta§ notes in his book «Kamuoyu, ileti§im ve Demokrasi» that the theories and approaches related to the formation of public opinion are mainly divided into two classical and modern. Scientists who have classical traditions always defend the thesis that people who act rationally have their own thoughts and opinions and they exhibit behaviors that are in line with their own interests. Modern theorists who oppose this claim that public opinion is a mixed subject and that despite the development of new information technologies, it is impossible for everyone to be equally aware of the same event. According to classical theorists: individuals who share a certain thought have sufficient prior knowledge of the events that gave rise to these thoughts; People who have a common belief act in the direction of logic; They believe that individuals have their own interests behind their active participation in public affairs.

Among the modern theories, the theory of effective majority and force is noteworthy. According to the effective majority theory, there is no need for a majority to form public opinion, and there is no need for unanimity. However, the conclusions should be accepted by the minorities who do not agree with those conclusions because of their beliefs. American political scientist and communication theorist Lassuel, one of the proponents of the theory of power, claims that basically in every political system, power is in the hands of an elite group. However, the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is that in a democracy, those affected are bilateral, while in a dictatorship, it is unilateral. Despite these differences, elites and economic leaders have the potential to manipulate the minds of individuals through limited information sharing and propaganda. In his studies, Lassuel, rather than directly addressing the essence of public opinion, as a social force, refined its influence on political power [2, 30-34].

According to some studies, while the media reinforces the views and beliefs of individuals, they are not effective in changing them. Some researchers claim that the media has the potential to direct the attitudes andjudgments ofindividuals, at least partially, it should also be considered the conscious, emotional and behavioral response of people, the conscious, emotional and behavioral response it regulates should also be considered, but also based on the experience and knowledge of people's relationships, that is, the experience and information of the individual himself or some issue in his environment.

Formation of public opinion in Turkey regarding the second Karabakh war

War journalism has been able to change the fate of many wars. For example, during the Vietnam War, when the camera was used for the first time, the freedom of journalists to broadcast the materials they prepared without being subjected to strict censorship encouraged the public in the United States to take actions against the war. People who witnessed terrible visions and terrible scenes from the war in their homes, where they were sitting, began to accuse the US government. It was emphasized that all this led to the gradual withdrawal of the US army from Vietnam. Aware of the power of the media to control and guide public opinion, America has realized that modern wars will not take place without the support of the people in the wars in the following stages, and that it is necessary to spend private power in order for the people to accept these wars and support this choice.

In the modern era, not only wars, but also the features of war journalism have changed. Along with the emergence of new media, the changes and transformation experienced in the process of preparing the news did not leave an impact on war journalism. Through citizen journalism, forming a branch of the new media, ordinary citizens had already begun to perform the work of reporters. For example, the photos taken from Ebu Gureyip prison can be shown as an example of this. These photos taken by the American soldiers were the main evidence that they tortured the prisoners [4, 153].

It is already a reality that in the experienced wars of modern times, one will not gain advantage only by being strong in terms of manpower and military-technical equipment. The party with more information and information holds the main power in its hands and can change the outcome of the war in its favor. From this point of view, effective use of media during the process is one of the main issues in the focus of the states in the period in which the processes occur. During the second Karabakh war, it is possible to observe that the state played an active role in the implementation of information exchange in Azerbaijan. In this regard, the research work prepared by Kurbani Geyik, a teacher of the Hittite University of Turkey, based on interviews conducted by him with 6 professional journalists who were at the scene during the war, provides explanatory information [6]. During the second Karabakh war, journalists directly observed the events from places where there there were more airstrikes in peaceful residential areas and the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan were the sources of news they often turned to regarding the events on the front line.

In the formation of public opinion, one of the important nuances is how the information is presented, along with the sources from which it is obtained. Turkish media representatives who followed the progress of the war in Azerbaijan played a special role in creating public opinion about the war in Turkey, along with the content of their media products. Friendship and fraternal relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey are connected to the deep historical roots and are of great importance in creating a positive public opinion. The Ottoman state sent the Turkish - Islamic army to help, which will provide the necessary support for the Republic of Azerbaijan to declare its independence even during the weakest period of the Ottoman state. At the same time, Turkey was one of the first countries to recognize Azerbaijan's independence after the collapse of the USSR, during the First Karabakh War, it was particularly active in international organizations for the solution of the problem, and made various proposals. Over time, relations between the two countries have become closer and cooperation in various fields has been increased. All these factors did not affect the form and content of the materials prepared in the Turkish media about the Second Karabakh War, and played an exceptional role in the formation of public opinion about the warring countries in the Turkish society.

It is possible to characterize the materials related to the Second Karabakh war in the Turkish media in four contexts:

- During the war which continues, criticism of the political situation in Armenia and evaluating the processes in Azerbaijan in a positive direction;

- Discussing Turkey's war - related foreign policy;

- Criticism of the one-sided, biased attitude of the Western media to the events;

- Discussion of the position of world states and international organizations.

In terms of information policy, it is possible to see a situation that actually prevails all over the world in the media system of Turkey. It can be said that the during the Second Kharabakh War, media organizations characterized as antiopposition, authoritarian and independent tried to stand in the middle position within the framework of friendly and brotherly relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey. At the same time, these friendships have been reflected in news headlines, headings, and various social media platforms.

Karabuk University researcher Sheyma Sogancioglu's research on how to prepare and present materials dedicated to the Second Karabakh War in «Sabah» and «Cumhuriyet» newspapers, which have opposing ideologies, revealed many interesting points. Karabuk University researcher §eyma Sogancioglu's research on how to prepare and present materials dedicated to the Second Karabakh War in Sabah and Cumhuriyet newspapers, which have opposing ideologies, revealed many interesting points. Attention was drawn to Armenia's targeting of peaceful residential areas of Azerbaijan and loss of lives of peaceful citizens. Giving space to the statements of both countries about the war has become an important fact from the point of view of the impartiality principle of journalism in the news published in «Sabah» and «Jumhuriyyet» newspapers. Despite the fact that the statements given in the news were merely informative without any explanation, the analysis of the words used revealed that Armenia was the party that started the war. Armenia's attacks to the places where the peaceful of civilian population of Azerbaijan and violations of the law of war have often been presented with reports and images from the scene, as well as live broadcasts. Turkish media has taken a critical approach to the occupation actions and unjust attacks of Armenia [9, 110-115].

In the scientific research conducted by Anadolu University teacher Devrim Deniz Erol in «Hurriyet», «Sabah», «Milliyet», «Turkiye» and «Posta» newspapers in Turkey, the photos of 1191 news items examined up to the date of the start and end of the war contained important results about how the war and the parties were represented. In the photos, it was emphasized that Azerbaijan was unjustly attacked by Armenia. At the same time, it is written in the photos and news headlines that Azerbaijan is targeting only military facilities, not the areas where peaceful citizens live. Armenia's attack on civilians in Azerbaijan, which committed a war crime, was characterized as deadly. Photos of politicians from some regions of the world, especially Russia, were published along with statements stating that they are not with Armenia. Actions of people from certain regions of the world condemning Armenia and supporting Azerbaijan, which is in the right position, were featured in the news. The victory of Azerbaijan, which was presented as the winner of the war, was associated with its professional hitting of military targets and its modern military technology that possessess. In the news-views in the context of friendly relations, the soldiers of Azerbaijan and Turkey saluted by hand, the flags of both countries were placed side by side and a message of unity and equality was given [4, 160-170].

In the Turkish media, at the same time, the non-objective attitude of the Western media to the events has become an object of criticism, and the indifferent and biased position of the influential international media organizations against the killing of civilians has been criticized.

Yusuf Ozkir, Associate Professor of Journalism Faculty of Istanbul Medipol University, speaking at Anadolu Agency, emphasized that the information policies are very tight because the world's leading news agencies such as Sputnik from Russia, Agence France Presse (AFP) from France, France 24, BBC from England, Reuters and Associated Press (AP) from the United States are publishing biased content. At the same time, Ozkir drew attention to the failure of media organizations such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and CNN to report on the incident after the bombing of Ganja [13].

An analysis of sites that appeal to a large audience, such as Ensonhaber.com, Hurriyet. com.tr, Milliyet.com.tr, Sozcu.com.tr, Mynet. com, Trthaber.com, Yenisafak.com, Yeniakit.com. tr, Haberturk.com, Sabah.com.tr, Haberler.com, Haber7.com, Haberglobal.com.tr, Ntv.com.tr among the most visited news sites in Turkey, shows that there is a wide range of war-related materials. In the materials, the Nagorno-Karabakh problem has been characterized as one of the world's oldest unresolved conflicts, and the opinions of experts have been analyzed and the statements of officials have been included. «A century of blood legacy», «From the operation to the front»?, «Azerbaijan's backup power is support from Turkey» locted on Haberturk.com website. In the articles entitled «The collected money has been sent», efforts were made to convey the rightful position of Azerbaijan to the public. About 200 news and analytical articles on the topic were published on Ensonhaber.com within 44 days. On the day the war officially began, journalist Tolga Ozgench presented material that thoroughly analyzed the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. In his article titled «Things to know about Nagorno-Karabakh in 6 questions», the journalist tried to inform the society by answering the following questions in detail:

- When did the Nagorno-Karabakh problem begin?;

- What is the Bishkek protocol that was signed 26 years ago and remains only on paper;

- Why international organizations could not find a solution;

- How Russia played a role in delaying the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh problem;

- What is Turkey's approach to the Nagorno - Karabakh issue;

- What are the solution proposals of the parties in Nagorno-Karabakh, which is a frozen problem in the Caucasus [16].

The analysis shows that the Turkish media showed a professional and sensitive approach from the start of the war to its end, provided complete and unequivocal information support to our country with its objective and truth-based position, leading TV channels also reported directly on the basis of the information provided by their frontline correspondents, prepared reports from Azerbaijani soldiers, revealed the vandal and savage face of the Armenians by presenting facts, evidence and evidence that they killed civilians using various weapons and ammunition and shared the news of the liberation of Shusha from the occupation with the headline «Freedom to the Heart of Karabakh» and shared his joy with the soldiers and people of Azerbaijan. With this, it had its influence on the Karabakh war being reflected in the world press. Compared to some biased media subjects of the USA, Europe and Russia, the sensitive approach of the Turkish media to the events is of great importance. During the war and after its end, its development process and outcome became the main topic of discussion in Turkish television programs, in addition to the press, and many programs related to the event were prepared.

Interviews given by President Ilham Aliyev to «TRT Haber», «Haber Turk», «A Haber», «CNN - Turk», «Haber Global», NTV television channels, information presented by Turkish media against the background of Azerbaijan's rightful struggle, analytical articles, and programs played an effective role in strengthening the reputation of Azerbaijan in the country's public.

The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, which has gone down in history as one of the longest and most intense conflicts in the South Caucasus, has led to bloody wars twice in 1991-1994 and from September 27 to November 10, 2020. The second Karabakh war should be described as the power advantage of modern Azerbaijan, which has more advanced capabilities. Although the events are presented with different aspects in the context of international relations and international media, Turkey and its media have always shown a fair approach and written the truth.

Manipulated information causes forming of the wrong thoughts about events [3, 53-54].

Conclusions. The form of presentation of events by the media has the potential to influence the thoughts of the masses in different directions. Therefore, the truth, a fair position, and adherence to the principles of journalism are important factors in the correct formation of public opinion, and the fair presentation of the 44-day Patriotic War in the Turkish media from various aspects played an exceptional role in the correct formation of public opinion about the problem.

Bibliography

1. Attar A. (2005). Karabag Sorunu Kapsaminda Ermeniler Ve Ermeni Siyaseti, Ataturk Ara§tirma Merkezi, Ozgur Matbaa, Ankara, alinti. S. 122.

2. Bekta§ A. (1996). Kamuoyu, Ileti§im ve Demokrasi. Baglam Yayincilik. Istanbul

3. Entman, R.M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), S. 51-58

4. Erol D.D. (2022). Daglik Karabag Sava§fnin Turkiye Basininda Temsili: Sava§ Fotograflari Uzerine Bir Cali§ma. E-GIFDER. 10 (1). S. 150-175.

5. Gaffar Јaxmaqli (2009). Daglik Karabag i§galdan evvel…ve sonra, Herbi Ne§riyyat, Baku

6. Geyik K. (2021). Sava§ Gazeteciliginde Degi§en Roller: 2. Karabag Sava§i Ornegi. Ataturk Universitesi Ileti§im Dergisi. 21. S. 53-71.

7. Ibadov A. (2009). Azerbaycan Di§ Politikasinda Daglik Karabag Sorunu ve Ermeni Sorunu: ^ozumler, Oneriler. Doktora Tezi

8. McQuail D. (2010). Mass Communication Theory. SAGE Publications. New Delhi.

9. Sogancioglu §. _ (2022). Ikinci Karabag Sava§inin Turk Basinina Yansimalari: «Cumhuriyet» ve «Sabah» Gazeteleri. Avrasiya Incelemeler Dergisi. 11 (1). S. 89-120.

10. §en L. (2008). Soguk Sava§ sonrasi Turkiye'nin Guney Kafkasya politikasi, Ankara, S. 22. Yuksek Lisans Tezi

11. Temizel H. (2008). Kamuoyu Kuramlari ve Kamuoyu Olu§umunda Kitle Ileti§im Araflari. SU IIBF Sosyal ve Ekonomik Ara§tirmalar Dergisi. 8 (15). S. 126-146

12. Yildirim D., Ozonder C. (1990). Karabag Dosyasi, Turk Kulturu Ara§tirma Enstitusu Yayinlari:110, 3. seri, Sayi A:29, №812, Ankara. S. 27.

13. ANALYSIS - Western media's approach to Nagorno-Karabakh rife with bias and prejudice. URL: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis (date of publication: 2.06.2022). (in Turkish)

14. Fuliya Soyba§. Kafkasya'da sava§ resmen ba§ladi mi. URL: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar (in Turkish)

15. Ermenistan'da Pa§inyan kar§iti gosterilerde §iddet tirmaniyor URL: https://www.ensonhaber.com/ dunya (date of publication: 13.07.2022). (in Turkish)

16. Daglik Karabag konusunda bilinmesi gerekenler: 6 soruda Daglik Karabag URL: https://www.aa.com. tr/tr/azerbaycan-cephe-hatti (date of publication: 12.08.2022). (in Turkish)

References

1. Attar A. (2005). Karabag Sorunu Kapsaminda Ermeniler Ve Ermeni Siyaseti [Armenians and Armenian Politics in the Scope of the Karabakh Problem], Ataturk Ara§tirma Merkezi, Ozgur Matbaa, Ankara, alinti S 122. (in Turkish)

2. Bekta§ A. (1996). Kamuoyu, iletifm ve Demokrasi [Communication and Democracy]. Baglam Yayincilik. Istanbul (in Turkish)

3. Entman, R.M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4). S. 51-58

4. Erol D.D. (2022). DaglikKarabagSavagi'nm Turkiye Basininda Temsili: Sava§Fotograflari UzerineBir Qaligma [Representation of the Nagorno-Karabakh War in the Turkish Press: A Study of War Photographs].

E-GIFDER. 10 (1). S. 150-175. (in Turkish)

5. Gaffar Јaxmaqli (2009). Daglik Karabag i^galdan evvel…ve sonra [Nagorno-Karabakh before and after occupation]. Herbi Ne§riyyat, Baku: (in Turkish)

6. Geyik K. (2021). Sava§ Gazeteciliginde Degi^en Roller: 2. Karabag Sava^i Ornegi [The Changing Role in War Journalism: 2. The Example of the Karabakh War]. Ataturk Universitesi ileti§im Dergisi. 21. S. 53-71 (in Turkish)

7. ibadov A. (2009) Azerbaycan Di§ Politikasinda Daglik Karabag Sorunu ve Ermeni Sorunu: Qozumler, Oneriler [The Nagorno-Karabakh Problem and the Armenian Problem in Azerbaijan's Foreign Policy: Solutions, Suggestions]. Doktora Tezi (in Turkish)

8. McQuail D. (2010). Mass Communication Theory. SAGE Publications. New Delhi.

9. Sogancioglu §. (2022). ikinciKarabagSava^inin TurkBasinina Yansimalari: «Cumhuriyet» ve «Sabah» Gazeteleri [Reflections of the Second Karabakh War in the Turkish Press: «Cumhuriyet» and «Sabah» Newspapers]. Avrasiya incelemeler Dergisi. 11 (1). S. 89-120. (in Turkish)

10. §en L. (2008). Soguk Sava§ sonrasi Turkiye'nin Guney Kafkasyapolitikasi [Turkey's South Caucasus policy after the Cold War], Ankara, S 22. Yuksek Lisans Tezi (in Turkish)

11. Temizel H. (2008). Kamuoyu Kuramlari ve Kamuoyu Olu^umunda Kitle iletifm Araglari [Public Theory and Mass Communication Tools in Public Opinion Formation]. SU iiBF Sosyal ve Ekonomik Ara§tirmalar Dergisi. 8 (15). S. 126-146 (in Turkish)

12. Yildirim D., Ozonder C. (1990). Karabag Dosyasi [Karabakh File], Turk Kulturu Ara§tirma Enstitusu Yayinlari:110, 3. seri, Sayi A:29, №812, Ankara. S. 27.

13. ANALYSIS - Western media's approach to Nagorno-Karabakh rife with bias and prejudice. URL: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis (date of publication: 2.06.2022). (in Turkish)

14. Fuliya Soyba§. Kafkasya'da sava§ resmen bafadi mi [Has the war officially started in the Caucasus?]. URL: https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar (in Turkish)

15. Ermenistan'da Pafnyan kar^iti gosterilerde fddet tirmaniyor [Violence escalates in anti-Pashinyan demonstrations]. URL: https://www.ensonhaber.com/dunya (date of publication: 13.07.2022). (in Turkish)

16. Daglik Karabag konusunda bilinmesi gerekenler: 6 soruda Daglik Karabag [What you need to know about Nagorno-Karabakh: Nagorno-Karabakh in 6 questions]. URL: https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/azerbaycan - cephe-hatti (date of publication: 12.08.2022). (in Turkish)

Размещено на Allbest.ru