Almost every week I convene with my colleagues from around the world and debate the problems of Turkey's media. I tell them: "In order to understand ontological problems in Turkish media we mustn't restrict ourselves with analyzing media ownership complications and freedom of speech issues. After all, the media in Turkey was not founded on rational grounds. Rather, throughout history, we see that newspapers have been created with a view of disseminating propaganda. The reason newspapers were popular in the past was their power, not their freedom of expression, and therefore, the media has always been seen as an ideological tool in Turkey's history.I say "Turkey's history," but a similar situation still lingers today. Almost no newspaper in Turkey is financially profitable, yet every year we see new periodicals in the arena. Why? Because these newspapers are founded with a political and ideological purpose, and instead of producing journalism, they act according to those purposes, going out of business when this purpose is fulfilled. What remains is hundreds of out-of-work journalists.When I say this, several of my colleagues demand specific examples. I tell them the stories of Türk Yurdu and Anatolian journals, Cumhuriyet, Ulus, Tan and Taraf newspapers, as well as Kadro, Yön and Aydınlık magazines. I tell them about Zaman's transformations and explain the ethical problems that arise when a newspaper's ideological aims do not coincide with the principles of journalism.This week I plan to give a specific and authentic example on how these problems occur.An influential playerThe Committee of Union and Progress (Turkish: İttihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti) was founded in the 19th century. It was a pivotal institution in the final Ottoman period and even during the first years of the Republic. The founders of the committee were four young men studying in the Military Medical School. Their names were Ibrahim Temo, Ishak Sükuti, Abdullah Cevdet and Çerkez Mehmed Resid. This society, founded in 1899 by four people in the gardens of a military school, was first named the Committee of the Ottoman Union (Turkish: İttihad-ı Osmani). But in time it grew so exponentially that even its founders were left on the sidelines.Last year, İbrahim Temo's memoirs were published , one of the founders that prided himself for staying loyal to their cause until the very end. The name of the book is "İttihat ve Terakki Anılarım" (My Memoirs of Union and Progress).Şerif Mardin wrote the prologue of the book, and here is a quote from him: "It is hard to encounter anyone as convicted in their democratic ideals and its uncorrupted protection as the Young Turks. İbrahim Temo was one of those ideological heroes."Do not let the words "democratic ideals" in Mardin's prologue confuse you. In today's sense, Temo had no idea what democracy was, and would not even have come close to being democratic. He was more like a relentless revolutionary. He even supported the idea that revolutions can be bloody if necessary, and in order to achieve the revolution's aims, people can be killed. Temo believed planting bombs in holy places and parliamentary buildings was a revolutionary act. We encounter similar journalists today and they are usually depicted as media heroes or victims of oppression in the reports produced by Freedom House and the Committee to Protect Journalists.According to Temo, in order to fulfill a political agenda, lying, slander and even assassination are not terrible acts. He applauded when Şemsi Pasha was assassinated while exiting the Monastery Post Office. Şemsi Pasha was sent by Sultan Abdülhamid II to soothe the uprising in Greece. Temo mentioned Mülazım Atıf – the person who assassinated Şemsi Pasha – as a "hero of freedom." Reading Temo's memoirs it is apparent that he himself planned an assassination together with his friends. They gave a young man a bomb and sent him to Istanbul in order to assassinate Sultan Abdülhamid II. But the man got cold feet thinking the police were on to him, and so threw the bomb into the waters of Bosporus.Explosive thoughtsAnother event Temo mentions in his memoirs is that after the second Balkan War, Bulgarians were marching on Istanbul after capturing Edirne. At that time, Temo and his friends had just returned to Istanbul from Romania. Their biggest concern was what would happen if the Bulgarians managed to capture Istanbul and erect a statue on top of the Hagia Sophia's dome. After deliberating the situation, a pasha asked Temo what they should do if the Bulgarians indeed captured Istanbul and turned the Hagia Sophia back into a Christian cathedral. Temo's answer was:"His lordship, benevolent pasha! You are in command of the Zeytinburnu armory. Grant us explosives … After arranging one of the servants of the Hagia Sophia to plant these under the floor of the mosque and extending its cord to one of the nearby buildings with an electrical battery, we can detonate it while the fanatics are worshiping and erecting the statue. This would be a most fitting revenge."In short, Temo suggested blowing up the Hagia Sophia when the Bulgarians were busy with their benedictions in order to exact revenge.Compared to the pastLet us go back to our main point. After it was discovered that he had founded a secret society, Temo fled to Romania in 1895. The first thing he did in Romania was to organize Ottoman citizens residing there against the padishah, primarily by publishing journals and newspapers. His purpose of course was not to inform the public, but to use these means of propaganda to fulfill his aims – an act he repeated several times and mentions in his memoirs.These newspapers were smuggled into the centers of the Ottoman Empire and with them, a particular agenda was constructed. Temo was not a journalist, but more of a chief intelligence officer.One of the ideas written in his articles was: "Since madrasahs, sanctuaries, dervish lodges and mosques are only occupied by owls and do not produce any good, they should be transformed into small art galleries or given to industry to produce profits or become health clinics."Temo was a journalist who was in favor of the state seizing control of mosques, madrasahs and dervish lodges. Here is an important question: "Why did Temo prefer to publish newspapers instead of cheaper alternatives such as propaganda brochures? This question also applies to many newspapers in Turkey today.I hope I have managed to get my point across.