A number of newspapers and television channels have been taken into receivership in Turkey in the past year. Social media accounts have been closed down. Such actions, naturally have caused great concern. The freedom of expression is one of our most precious rights, and one that no one wants to lose.Yet when discussing freedom of expression, freedom of the media and all that goes with it in Turkey there is so often an aspect that is overlooked.The media outlets, print or broadcast and the social media accounts that have been closed down all have one thing in common. Ah yes, you say. I know the answer - they are opposed to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his government.No. That is not the common denominator. As surprising as it may seem there are plenty of newspapers and social media accounts in Turkey that openly criticize - even insult - the president and/or the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government.The feature shared by these media outlets and social media accounts is that they in some way support terrorism.Turkey is in the unique and unfortunate position of having three terrorist groups active in the region. Daesh, the PKK and the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ). While Daesh is more inclined to stick to social media to get its message across, the PKK and FETÖ have invested heavily in print and broadcast media.And thus emerges a question not often (as far as I have been able to discern) faced in the West. What should a government's reaction be if terrorist groups use print, broadcast and social media to spread their poison?Daesh setting up a television channel in the U.S. to broadcast and finance its message is unthinkable. They could perhaps have a children's television channel that earns revenue to fund their terrorist acts. And with this innocuous looking channel they could also give subliminal messages. It is hard to imagine the U.S. government tolerating such a channel.Or Daesh starts a broadsheet. They pump up circulation figures by having their supporters subscribe hundreds of times over. Any wealthy businessman with Daesh allegiances has to take out 100, 1,000 or more subscriptions. How clever! Now Daesh not only can get out its message, but it can also earn revenue to support its nefarious actions.Impossible! Such a thing would never happen. But this is exactly what has happened in Turkey. The PKK and FETÖ both own/owned newspapers and media outlets. They use them to financially and ideologically support their terrorist acts. It is these outlets that are being closed down.Perhaps you find this hard to believe. But to demonstrate to the reader that the media is still pretty healthy in Turkey, allow me to give some figures concerning print media.Of 44 newspapers published in Turkey, seven of these newspapers are neutral, that is sometimes speaking for the government, sometimes against the government (for example Habertürk or Hürriyet). Fourteen are pro-government (Sabah or Yeni Şafak), 21 are anti-government (Sözcü or Cumhuriyet). And two are sporting newspapers.The circulation figures make interesting reading as well. The circulation figures for the neutral newspapers make up a total of 37.7 percent of the total. That of the pro-government papers makes up 32.5 percent of the total and the anti-government newspapers 22.3 percent of the total, leaving 7.5 percent of the total to the sporting news.These figures belie the idea that Turkey's press is under pressure. If you look at some of the headlines in Sözcü or Cumhuriyet this is clear. The former in particular takes great delight in insulting the president of Turkey and his family.But, you say, healthy readership is not enough to establish that there is no oppression of the press. Newspapers are being closed down! Television channels are being shut! This is oppression.To understand the situation a bit better, let's turn back to the discussion about terrorism and the media. As said above, if Daesh were to suddenly establish a cartoon channel which raised revenue for the organization and perhaps even subliminally radicalized young people, no Western government would hesitate to close such a channel down. To not close down such a network would be negligent and irresponsible.Indeed, the argument in the West is not about "what happens if terrorists have media channels," but rather about how much terrorist activities should be included in the news. There is a fear that by showing terrorist attacks that the media is giving them free publicity. Without publicity, without an outlet, terrorist organizations cannot get new recruits, nor inspire fear.While it is understood that journalists need the freedom to cover events (including terrorist attacks) without restraint, it is clear that both governments and the media do not want to be manipulated into unwittingly promoting terrorism. Thus, there is a delicate balance between maintaining freedom of press and not giving terrorists publicity. As we saw in the bombing in Brussels in March, there was a media blackout (including social media), preventing the terrorists from manipulating the attack into propaganda.It was Margaret Thatcher who said that publicity is the oxygen of terrorism. Public perception is the primary target of terrorism - it is only through manipulation of public perception that fear can be created. And it is the media that shapes public perception.But this argument is not about "What if terrorist organizations own television channels or newspapers?" Rather, it is about inadvertently promoting terrorism via news reports. It is only in Turkey that the argument pivots on terrorist organizations owning media outlets.Here in Turkey, the closure of social, print and broadcast media is not a matter of political oppression. Rather, it is directly linked to the matter of not giving terrorists publicity. Such moves are made to eliminate platforms from which terrorists can speak and radicalize people, in particular the youth. Secondly, these moves are made in order to eliminate funding for terrorist acts. Be it poppies for heroin or television and newspaper revenue, the money earned by terrorist organizations goes to the same end.Indeed, both the PKK and FETÖ have learned that while trafficking drugs makes a lot of money fast, television channels and newspapers are viewed favorably by the Western world; media institutions are considered to be "sacred cows." And this serves the purpose of the terrorists. Touch the media and you are seen to be a dictator.To sum up, the media that is being closed down in Turkey is not the media that we are familiar with in the Western world. The media outlets in question produce funding for terrorist acts. But they also spread propaganda for groups that radicalize young people, and which take innocent lives, using suicide bombers, F-16s and tanks.The press is under pressure in Turkey. It is under pressure from three different terrorist organizations. Yet, this press can still produce a headline like that which appeared in Cumhuriyet on Jan. 31, 2015: "Erdogan snatches first place from Baghdadi." The story? In a questionnaire in Holland, Erdoğan was awarded dictator of the year. And this is the front page story. And this is only one example out of hundreds from the 21 newspapers that love to attack the president of Turkey.A free and unhindered press is something that every journalist in Turkey wants. But to achieve this we first need to have a responsible and untainted press. The only thing standing in the way of this is terrorism.