The AK Party's first election victory on November 3, 2002 will go down in history as the beginning of a popular struggle against the establishment which traces its heritage back to the atrocious Committee of Union and Progress (CUP) of the early 20th century. If one were to compile the entire collection of anti-democratic interventions, suspicious events, coup attempts and military memoranda that the country's elected government had to endure since that day, the outcome would be nothing short of a very thick volüme. The party's leader, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, had to fight off similar challenges at least since his election as Istanbul mayor back in 1994, when a religious and anti-establishment figure assumed the office for the first time in history.This is not a democratic struggle. In other words, it is not a political struggle, instead it is a struggle for sovereignty. It was a time period during which the Unionist elites and the people had waged "war" against one another. Up until now, each standoff between the government and the establishment ended with the former side's victory to cause severe emotional harm to the country's old guard - which conveniently used the media, just like the court system, as an instrument of power. Turks have long lost count of anti-establishment figures who ended up in prison or worse due to the mainstream media's character assassinations. A few names that immediately come to mind include Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink, who was killed outside his office in 2007, and Kurdish singer Ahmet Kaya who died in exile.Turkish media outlets have played a particularly prominent role in the military's numerous interventions in civilian politics throughout the Republic's history. During the "postmodern coup" of Feb. 28, 1997, the media led the charge against the country's democratically elected government when the military refrained from getting directly involved in the affair. By manipulating news stories and spreading false news to mislead public opinion, the mainstream media made sure that the government would fall within a few months.Capitalizing on the media's alliance with the establishment, media owners would go as far as serving prime ministers in their homes while wearing pajamas, threatening and disgracing whomever they wanted. Up until the 2002 parliamentary elections, media owners who failed to win government contracts or had their differences with the political leadership wielded enough power to end careers for their own gain. In more than one instance, the country's secularist civilians effectively led the military commanders to oust elected governments.Throughout the Republic's history, a small group of elites exploited a range of opportunities and resources to keep all strategic offices under their control and used them, if necessary, against the people. Their fundamental approach to government created grievances among the Kurds, the Armenians and the Alevi community - chronic issues whose resolution would have hurt their interests. Such widespread inequality also worked well with their ideological disposition to Unionist ideas including opposition to equal citizenship and diversity. It is this historic background that manifests itself in the form of hatred directed at Prime Minister Erdoğan today.The times, however, have changed and the old guard - unable to garner support among domestic audiences -has developed a new language to appeal to 21st century Western sensitivities such as press freedom, freedom of expression and the separation of powers. While violating these values themselves at home, they like to play the victimized democrats - an act that seems to work wonders.The real story, however, is quite different:Today, opponents of Prime Minister Erdoğan and his reform agenda control approximately 65 percent of all media outlets, which launch attacks against pro-reform authors on a daily basis due to their sheer dislike of competing discourses. The same papers - which conveniently covered up the bombing of Kurdish news outlet Özgür Gündem and countless executions of Kurdish journalist in the 1990s - can go as far as referring to the prime minister as a psychopath and threatening to "spit on his grave." As such, Turkey's press freedom record has improved significantly even though there remains room for improvement. Showing little interest in such concrete steps, Turkey's mainstream media remains embedded with the establishment in its power struggle with the people.