What’s next?

The success of Turkish dramas like The Club, on global platforms like Netflix is a positive example of how Turkish TV capitalizes on its rich storytelling tradition and the growing international demand for non-English content. This digital revolution also reflects Turkey’s evolving media consumption habits, where younger generations favor digital content over traditional broadcasting, creating new challenges for state-run broadcasters like TRT, which have traditionally enjoyed dominance in the market. The future of Turkish TV is shaped by its growing digital landscape, increased global presence, and the delicate balance between government control and media innovation. These elements will likely continue to influence how Turkish TV evolves in the coming years. One potential limitation for Turkish TV in the future could be the growing government regulation and censorship of content. While Turkey’s TV landscape has increasingly embraced digital and OTT platforms, the state continues to wield significant influence through agencies like the RTÜK, enforcing strict guidelines on broadcasting content, especially regarding topics like politics, religion, and national security. As OTT platforms gain popularity, the government has been tightening regulations on them, mandating local representation and content licensing requirements. This could lead to producers’ self-censorship of content that might challenge government stances or address politically sensitive topics. 

As Turkish dramas continue to become more successful abroad, particularly in the Middle East and Europe, there may be pressure to maintain certain cultural and political narratives that could limit creative freedom. While the global success of Turkish content offers significant opportunities for growth, it also creates a tension between adhering to international market demands and maintaining cultural integrity within Turkey’s restrictive media environment. This growing regulation could ultimately stifle the creativity and diversity that has helped Turkish TV stand out, particularly if the government imposes more content controls to preserve national interests and public morality.

The Club (Kulüp)

In extreme contrast to the TRT World documentary, I watched The Club (Kulüp) (2021). The Club is a Turkish historical drama series with elements of a family saga, musical moments, and telenovela-style melodrama. These aspects make it both a period piece and an emotional narrative produced by Netflix, set in 1950s Istanbul. It was created by Zeynep Günay Tan and features an ensemble cast led by Gökçe Bahadır as Matilda, a Sephardic Jewish woman freshly released from prison (Lior, 2021). The series follows Matilda’s struggle to reconnect with her estranged daughter, Rasel, while working at a nightclub called “Club Istanbul.” The Club has been praised for its rich portrayal of Sephardic Jewish culture, using details such as Ladino songs, Shabbat customs, and emotional depictions of Jewish life in 20th-century Istanbul, making it a unique exploration of a lesser-seen part of Turkish history. The production features a diverse cast and has been well-received, with high ratings and positive reviews for its historical accuracy and compelling storytelling (Lior, 2021).

I watched Season 1, Episode 1, an incredible introduction to the complex series. The episode begins with a young Matilda dropping a gun after shooting an unknown person. She locks a door, and the camera shows a heart carved in the door with “M + M” in the center. She walked away from the scene, and I was immediately hooked, wondering what her story is. The show fast-forwards seventeen years later to a large group of women sitting around a radio in a prison bunker. The broadcaster is speaking about a vote for pardoning those convicted of espionage and communism. Everyone cheers when they find they have been granted a pardon. We are finally introduced to the woman from the introduction, Matilda, as she is informed of the pardon and says a Jewish prayer. A free Matilda walks through the busy streets of Istanbul and arrives at her lawyer, Monsieur Davit’s home. She wants to go to Israel and claims to have no family, but Davit gives her a photo of her daughter, Rasel. Matilda leaves to stay at a hostel, and we see her Israeli identification before she rips up the photo of her daughter, and we watch the shredded paper slowly fall out the window. 

We move to Rasel, gossiping to her friend Tasula at the orphanage. Tasula wanted Rasel to find the chauffeur she has been seeing, Ismet, and give him a letter. The show flashes back and forth between the girl’s conversation and the interaction between Rasel and Ismet. Ismet tells Rasel not to trust him, but she gets in his car anyway. Later that night, they pulled into a dark parking lot, and Ismet told Rasel he liked her more than Tasula. He also tells her that he named his car Pakize and wipes off a mole she had drawn on her face, referencing Marilyn Monroe’s fame at the time. In the present time, Rasel lies to Tasula that she gave Ismet the letter, but he did not care because he left her for a blonde woman named Pakize. We flashback to Rasel getting out of Ismet’s car and throwing the letter in the trash. Rasel and Tasula break into Club Istanbul because Tasula works there and wants to get her ID from the manager’s desk. Tasula finds her ID, but Rasel is caught trying to steal cigarettes and alcohol by a club employee. She smashes a bottle on his head but does not escape. 

In the next scene, Matilda walks by a crowd standing in front of a store window watching the newly invented TV. She does not know what a TV is. Matilda walks to the subway and walks by one of the club managers, Ali, and five male immigrants he has hired. The camera follows Ali to the club, where they watch a musician named Selim get thrown out of the club.

Matilda returned to Davit’s house to get travel papers to go to Israel, but Davit is not there. The girl at the door tells Matilda (not knowing that she is Rasel’s mother) that Davit went to the police station because Rasel assaulted a Muslim employee of Club Istanbul. 

Back at the club, the manager, Celibi, warns the club employee who caught Rasel not to tell the club owner, Orhan. Celebi also tells Ali what happened with Rasel and again shows his fear of Orhan finding out. Ali tells the immigrant men they will be washing the floor, and then we see a woman singing opera in the dressing room of the club. Finally, we meet the club owner, Orhan. He is speaking to a man named Simon and tells him to “take Sevim tomorrow and go to the Bosporus. It’s turbot season.” We find out that Sevim is the female singer, and Simon is her agent. Orhan threatens to fire Sevim, but Simon reminds him of his long overdue bank loans. Orhan says that he does not stand for blackmail, and Simon leaves.

The musician, Selim (not to be confused with Sevim), returns to the club and pretends to be the police to get in. He finds Orhan and tells him the club is boring and he can help him. Selim says he will write songs about “alafranga and alaturca lovers,” terms that originated in the Ottoman Empire to describe Western style and Ottoman-Turkish style (Dorn, 1991). He tells Orhan that with his Turkish songs, he will tell the story of the struggle between the East and West, love and change, and their home of Turkey, drawing all the lovers to Club Istanbul. 

Matilda arrives at the police station, where Davit learns that the club is not pressing charges against Rasel. Matilda only asks for her papers to go to Israel. Celibi, arrives and introduces himself to Matilda and seems entranced by her. He then suddenly says that he changed his mind, will be pressing charges, and that he will see them in court. In the cell, Rasel screams and bangs on the gates. Davit stands on the other side while Matilda watches and cries from behind the staircase. Davit tells Rasel that he should have sent her to Israel and that he will no longer put up with her mischief. Davit leaves, and Matilda doesn’t move. She is conflicted about whether to help the troubled daughter she abandoned. She eventually tells a policeman that she is Rasel’s mother and asks for the address of the man who pressed charges. 

Back at the club, the man at the front desk tells Celibi that the police have been speaking with Orhan for an hour. Celibi, not knowing that the man talking to Orhan is really just Selim, runs off looking worried. The man at the desk curses at Celibi, implying that Celibi is a shady guy. Celibi enters Orhan’s office, and Orhan introduces Selim as their new headline act and says he has fired Sevim. Celibi voices his concerns about having a male headliner, but Orhan defends Selim. Celibi goes to his own office, where he finds Matilda. Matilda offers to reimburse him if he drops the charges, but he refuses. He asks Matilda where she was while her daughter was in an orphanage. She declines the question, and he tells her that she will never be able to pay him for the damage she has caused. He says he will drop the charges if she signs a blank check and works at the club since she can’t get a job as an ex-convict. She is confused and asks how he knows that. Celibi threatens her again but does not give her any more information. 

Matilda runs outside, pulls out her crumpled Israeli ID, and flashes back to a younger version of herself being charged, pleading guilty in court and being charged with murder. Back in real time, she is wearing the same coat and shoes as 17 years prior. Selim is beside her, smoking a cigarette, and notices that her shoes are from the 1941 Chanel collection. He lights a cigarette for her, tells her about his performance anxiety, and invites her to his debut show. He notices the Israel ID and says, “I would do anything to get on that ship and get out of here,” but notices her sadness and lightens his mood a bit by singing the song “Matilda.”

Back in the club, Matilda gives Celibi her ID papers, and he drops the charges against Rasel. A released Rasel walks home with Davit’s son but ditches him and hops on a bus. Celibi introduces Matilda to her job doing laundry, and they hear Selim singing. Everyone gathers to watch, and Orhan looks satisfied. Selim points at Matilda in a show of comradery while singing, but Celibi pushes her away. We see Matilda doing laundry and Celibi looking at a photo he keeps in his desk of a young Matilda smiling with men and women standing around her under a sign that says “Aseo Maritime Shipping.” One man in the picture resembles Celibi. Selim finishes his song, and everyone claps. This an extremely engaging end to the first episode, as it left me wondering who Celibi is and reminded me of Matilda’s mysterious past.

In the final scene of the first episode, Matilda enters the orphanage and flashes back to her time in prison when she gave her baby to Davit with a small necklace. She did not want to, but she had no choice. In real-time, Matilda enters Rasel’s room in the orphanage and introduces herself. Rasel smiles, and a loud, ticking clock sounds before the episode ends. 

Despite so many characters being introduced in one episode, the creator successfully told a little bit of each person’s compelling story, leaving me intrigued with many questions wondering what will happen next. I really enjoyed the show and plan on watching the rest of it on my own time. I enjoyed the subtle historical signifiers that were not necessary, like the window TV and the Marilyn Monroe mole. Netflix did a great job at telling the story of Turkish history that is not shown on Turkish-funded broadcasting networks due to their severed relationship with Israel and complex history with Greece (Geybullayeva, 2021). The quality, the costumes, the music, the backgrounds, and the acting are incredible, and it feels like the show transports you back in time. Most of the show is spoken in Ladino, also known as Judeo-Spanish, a romance language spoken by Sephardic Jews. (Geybullayeva, 2021) Turkish, Greek, French, and English are also spoken in the show; all languages historically spoken in Turkey have been losing relevance due to Turkish Constitutional law restricting the education of non-native languages (Kaya, 2015).

TRT World; “The American Dilemma: Elections Amid Gaza War”

https://youtu.be/pzdBVnDAPU0?si=Zpy3aBQ-gCsJPvk1

TRT World, a global news and documentary YouTube platform owned by the state broadcaster TRT provides a unique perspective on the intersection of American politics and Middle Eastern geopolitics. TRT World is widely recognized for its international news coverage. However, it has faced severe criticism and controversy, especially regarding its perceived alignment with Turkish government viewpoints and levels of censorship. Despite this, the platform is relatively popular, particularly in regions where viewers seek alternative perspectives to mainstream Western media. Its digital presence on platforms like YouTube has helped it reach a broad audience, giving it an increasingly important role in global news and documentary content. 

I watched The TRT World digital docuseries on YouTube titled “The American Dilemma: Elections Amid Gaza War” (2024). The twenty-minute “exclusive documentary” examines the recent US presidential election within the context of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas and intends to uncover truths about the US government’s involvement in Israel’s ongoing war on Palestine and how the Israeli lobby manipulates US elections. TRT interviews people with direct connections to the war and others who are highly educated in relevant fields. 

The documentary has a powerful start, speaking with Lexis Zeidan, a first-generation Palestinian Christian American and co-founder of the Uncommitted National Movement, which has grown to have over 730,000 uncommitted American voters. Zeidan tells her story and the history of her ancestors in an interview format with TRT. Her grandparents were victims of the 1948 catastrophe when the Zionist regime invaded Palestine and forcibly displaced 750,000 Palestinians and killed others. 200,000 Israelis marched to claim Jerusalem. She speaks about how 1/3 of the US budget goes toward making weapons for war that are murdering innocent people. A clip shows the incumbent Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking to a crowd of Americans, saying, “Give us the tools faster, and we’ll finish the job faster.” Zeidan reiterates that the ongoing assault did not start on October 7th; it has been happening to Palestinians since 2008. 

TRT interviewed Rosalind Petchesky, a professor of political science and member of the Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) organization. Her father and grandmother were proud Zionists, but Petchesky had doubted her Jewish background since age 16. Petchesky was arrested multiple times while protesting in New York City and Washington D.C. She contradicts this later in the documentary, saying police did not want to arrest her, “a little old white Jewish lady.” 

JVP chained themselves to the White House fence in 2023 to protest the horrific genocide happening while many Jewish people were celebrating Hannukah. Emotional videos of wounded, crying Palestinian children are shown while Petchesky says that Israel targets children so that there will be no hope of a Palestinian future.

A more controversial person being interviewed is Hassan Abdel Salam, the founder of the “Abandon Harris” movement. He claims that “a simple call (from the White House) to Netanyahu can forever end the bombardments, the attacks, the occupation, perpetual in its destruction.” Salam says abandoning Harris is our moral responsibility because she enables genocide. Petchesky reiterates his stance, saying Biden could have stopped the funding and, therefore, stopped Netanyahu. She says it is outrageous that Netanyahu was invited to address Congress while the bombs we are paying for are tearing Palestinians to pieces.

TRT also interviewed Alex Smith, former senior advisor of USAID, who provided a journalist’s perspective. He has worked in international law and public health for 23 years, and this is the first time he has been censored when trying to speak about a public health issue. He was scheduled to give a presentation at a USAID conference, but his presentation was canceled the day before because he had planned to speak about Gaza. The US State Department sent him over 100 documents, including a language guide with unacceptable words and approved words. He was told he could not include the word “Palestine,” could not refer to Arab Israeli citizens as “Palestinians,” and could not include maps showing the Gaza borders. Smith says he was shocked but not surprised and decided to resign. He clarifies that the US giving arms to Israel under these conditions that violate human rights is illegal internationally and domestically in the US. 

John Ehrenberg, Emeritus Professor of Political Science at Long Island University, speaks about American politician’s universal support for Israel. Ehrenberg says, “There is no upside in American politics for really defying Israel and the Israeli lobby here in the United States” because both parties are solid in their support. President Biden has supported Israel throughout his entire career. Clips of past presidents play while Ehrenberg speaks: Bill Clinton in front of American and Israeli flags, George W. Bush with Israeli leaders, Barrack Obama with Netanyahu, and Donald Trump with Netanyahu.

What I believe to be the downfall of the short documentary is the long interview with former Green-party presidential candidate Jill Stein. Stein speaks about the use of 2,000-pound bombs dropped on a school in Gaza City and a refugee center at a time when the highest number of people would be killed. Stein says that the US is the power behind this war, and Israel is a proxy for the US. She says that regarding US law, the transfer of weapons is forbidden to countries that are violating human rights and interfering with the delivery of humanitarian aid. Stein makes important points; however, her clear bias against her competitors, reputation as a “Putin Puppet” (Windrem, 2018), and disclosed past investments (Reilly, 2016) make her an incredible source and take away from the rest of the video. 

The final ten minutes of the video focuses on the 2024 presidential candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, becoming an advertisement for Jill Stein. TRT shows a video of Harris professing her support for “Israel’s right to defend itself” and a clip of Trump debating Biden, saying Israel should “finish the job” and calling Biden “basically a Palestinian.” Both parties are bought and paid for by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and defense contractors; however, the documentary fails to criticize Jill Stein’s campaign funds either. 

Ehrenberg describes AIPAC as a “single-issue apparatus” because it is only concerned with affairs endemic to Israel. Credible news articles about AIPAC donations are shown while he speaks. Ehrenberg says that AIPAC used to trend towards the center of the political spectrum, but now that Israel has become an “overtly racially organized, theocratically driven right-wing government,” AIPAC has followed. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and AIPAC have created a hostile environment for Muslim members of Congress and anyone who wants to speak against Israel, stopping the advancement of human rights. Jill Stein says that AIPAC removed two congresspeople who spoke against Israel by conducting smear campaigns. A clip is then shown of Trump saying, “If you said anything bad about Israel or Jews, you were finished as a politician…the most powerful lobby in this country is Israel and Jewish people.” Stein continues to say, “There is nothing more antisemitic than to say that criticizing genocide is antisemitism.” 

The documentary also interviews Dalia Fahmy, Director of International Relations at Long Island University. Fahmy says the definition of antisemitism changed to include criticism of Israel and Israeli policy despite the criticism the Israeli government faces from its citizens. By calling any political discourse antisemitic, you eliminate any chance of political discourse. 

Stein’s call to action is to switch out the politicians working with AIPAC and the war contractors, but it is a difficult issue to correct because our government has been bought. She says we must call out hate crimes and peruse them as federal crimes because this election is the perfect time for a political transition. The documentary includes statistics showing that since October 7th, we have seen levels of anti-Arab, anti-Palestinian, and Islamophobic behavior increase. Fahmy speaks about three university students who were shot while wearing keffiyehs and a six-year-old boy who was stabbed to death by his neighbor for being Palestinian.

Rosalind Petchesky says she cannot imagine Trump being reelected and that we cannot sink into fascism. She says Israel is a state terrorist institution. As a Jew, she supports the right to Palestinian Resistance. Smith says he will not vote for either candidate because they both defend genocide. Ehrenberg says the future of American democracy is on the line. Salam asks, where do the Muslim Americans go in an Islamophobic country? The documentary ends powerfully, despite the Jill Stein interruptions, with videos of protests while Petchesky says, “Not in our name,” and Salam says, “Ceasefire now.”

Oh No! Censorship…

Despite the many positive, progressive aspects of Turkish TV, OTT platforms operate under regulations introduced in 2019, extending the authority of the Radio and TV Supreme Council (RTÜK) to cover on-demand media services (RTÜK, 2019). Platforms must obtain a license, pay annual fees, and comply with content oversight rules aimed at preventing obscenity, hate speech, and content deemed harmful to family values or national security. These laws, part of broader frameworks like Law No. 6112 and data protection regulations, also encourage data localization and user privacy safeguards (RTÜK, 2019). While ensuring regulatory oversight and consumer protection, the rules have faced criticism for potentially limiting freedom of expression and creating barriers for smaller content providers (Yackley, 2021). This regulatory environment reflects Turkey’s efforts to balance traditional broadcasting standards with the growing influence of digital media.

The government uses RTÜK to exert substantial control over TV and media content, enforcing content guidelines and censorship, especially regarding topics related to national security, religion, and family values. While there is a degree of freedom in the media, censorship remains a concern, with content sometimes restricted or altered to align with government policies. The government provides funding for production that aligns with national interests or promotes Turkish culture, but private production companies also rely on commercial investments, with growing support for digital platforms (Arslan, 2021). These dynamics shape the TV landscape in Turkey, creating a mix of state oversight and commercial growth.

To understand the future, we must understand the past…

According to Turkish Professor Savaş Arslan (2021), TV in Turkey began in 1952 with İTÜ TV, a pioneering station established by Istanbul Technical University, making it the first TV broadcaster in the country and among the earliest in Europe. İTÜ TV operated experimentally, focusing on educational and cultural content, but its limited reach and resources delayed widespread adoption of TV. Nationwide broadcasting began in 1968 with the establishment of the Turkish Radio and TV Corporation (TRT), which held a state-run monopoly until the 1990s. Early TRT programming emphasized news, education, and culture, reflecting its nation-building mission. (Arslan, 2021) The market expanded in the 1990s with the advent of private broadcasters like Star TV and Kanal D, which prioritized entertainment-driven programming. Over time, the concept of “quality TV,” marked by cinematic storytelling and complex narratives, has shaped the industry, aligning Turkish series with global standards (Verza, 2018). This evolution has positioned Turkey as the second-largest exporter of TV content worldwide, with its dramas captivating audiences across the Middle East, Latin America, Europe, and beyond. (Arslan, 2021) The combination of traditional storytelling with modern production techniques continues to define Turkish TV’s success on the world stage.

The rise in international demand for Turkish dramas, combined with the expansion of cable, digital, online, and OTT (over-the-top) platforms, has fueled the industry’s growth. TRT has remained popular for its wide range of content, offering channels like TRT 1 for general programming and TRT 2 for arts and culture, alongside private broadcasters such as Kanal D, Show TV, ATV, and Star TV. However, the rise of digital platforms is transforming consumption habits. Local services like BluTV and Exxen cater to domestic tastes, while international platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and YouTube are widely accessible and increasingly popular, especially among younger audiences seeking on-demand content (Arslan, 2021). The infrastructure supporting this ecosystem still includes terrestrial broadcasting but is dominated by satellite services like Digiturk and D-Smart, cable networks in urban areas, and internet streaming (Verza, 2018). While traditional broadcast and cable channels still dominate viewership, particularly among older demographics, OTT platforms are steadily gaining traction due to their convenience and variety. This dynamic interplay between enduring traditional media and rapidly expanding digital platforms highlights Turkey’s adaptation to global trends in TV and media consumption.