“Disinformation damages the belief of Turkmen people to more freer media, that would also lead to more democratic country” – said a Turkmen media expert, editor of Ashgabat times, published under the pseudonym Derya Zhomartov, in his article, written specifically for the analytical platform CABAR.asia
Turkmenistan with its uniqueness and closeness keeps its “exoticness” and click-baiting manner for online media outlets and content creators. According to the last World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Turkmenistan has managed to jump one ranking up by being world’s 178th most oppressive country[1]. RSF characterized Turkmenistan’s media environment as ‘ever-expanding news black-hole’[2]. Along with the RSF, Freedom House commented on press freedom of Turkmenistan as a ‘severely restricted’[3].
Government controls all media outlets in the country regardless its ownership status. All programs, that has been broadcasted, and all print media have to take approval from the special committee, that is dedicated to control all state media, before going to the public[4]. This committee is very similar to one in which Winston Smith, the protagonist of George Orwell’s 1984, works. The committee demands from newspapers to reshape every news in accordance with the policy of Big Brother, in this case President Berdimuhamedov.
Under these circumstances, it is almost impossible to understand real situation in the country by just analyzing Turkmenistan-based news outlets. Turkmen.news, RFE/RL’s Turkmen service, and Turkmenistan Chronicles are the most so-called independent online media outlets that focus on “What is happening in Turkmenistan?” As these news outlets mainly name their sources as anonymous ones or with their pseudonyms, it rises accountability concerns regarding news from Turkmenistan, and can give a floor to disinformation.
The pandemic effect
The spread of pandemic around the global has proved the disinformation argument. RFE/RL’s Turkmen service has published news which starts with “Citizens of Turkmenistan are prohibited from talking about the coronavirus” sentence on 26 March 2020[5]. After several days from this news article, RSF published country update, which uses RFE/RL’s article as a source, about Turkmenistan which has used “Turkmenistan” “coronavirus” and “ban” words in one sentence. RSF stated that Turkmen government ‘is putting its citizens in danger’ ‘by banning use of the word “coronavirus” on the streets and never mentioning it in official documents and in the media’[6]. This report has caused immediate spread of the disinformation. Media outlets like NPR[7], ABC News[8], Independent[9], CBS News[10], CNET[11] has taken next round in banned coronavirus relay. Despite the fact that this disinformation has debunked[12][13] and RSF has updated[14] its news with erasing all ban words, the news reports are still there. Only during March 2020, so-called Ashgabat based private media outlets like Turkmenportal, Business Turkmenistan and Arzuw News published 18, 6 and 5 news respectively about coronavirus and Turkmenistan. Not only private ones, but also State News Agency of Turkmenistan has mentioned the “coronavirus” word in 2 news reports in March 2020. First[15] was about the phone call between Berdimuhamedov and Mirziyoyev on 18th of March, and the second[16] was published about charter flights of Turkmen Airlines from China to Turkmenistan on 25th of March. One can say that the news reports of State News Agency are exception and do not answer the question whether “coronavirus” was banned or not. But if the “coronavirus” was really banned the Turkmenistan-based so-called private news websites would not publish the “coronavirus” news in the country where Ministry of National Security controls all private media outlets.
With the start of the pandemic, the so-called independent news outlets published several reports in which sources were local anonymous journalists or anonymous citizens. The above-mentioned media outlets do not make public the names of their Turkmenistan based reporters because of the of the security reasons by citing them as ‘Ashgabat correspondent’. Media outlets usually interpret their sources as people who agreed to speak in anonymity, and make their reporters’ names public after the detention by security forces or prisoning. This process damages the legitimacy of these media outlets’ presence in Turkmenistan, and causes the confusion in regard whether the news is reported by Turkmenistan-based journalist or ordinary citizen. Prisoning of Nurgeldi Halykov can serve as an example for this argument. On 14th of December 2020, Turkmen.news reported[17] that Nurgeldi Halykov, ‘resident of Ashgabat’, who forwarded the photo of WHO COVID-19 Mission to Turkmenistan in Yyldyz Hotel to the Turkmen.news, was jailed for four years with ‘fabricated charge.’ Publication wrote that Halykov ‘has been punished for his contact with members of the independent press.’ Turkmen.news had not written anything about Halykov’s relation to the publication rather than they ‘have reason to believe that he would have told’ them about his debt problem. After four days of the news report, on 18th December 2020, RSF has characterized[18] Halykov as a journalist who ‘works clandestinely’ for Turkmen.news. The publication only acknowledged[19] its cooperation with Halykov in February of 2020 by naming him as “our correspondent”, and wrote that Halykov had ‘cooperated with Turkmen.news for several years.’ On 17th of February, Special Repporteur of United Nations sent letter[20] to Turkmen government by asking the current situation of Halykov. In that letter Halykov characterized as a ‘freelance journalist and long-time correspondent with an independent media and human rights group.’ When looking the timeline of the above-mentioned events, one can understand the confusion on who is who.Bans create place for disinformation
Every ban of the Turkmen government introduces another disinformation with itself. In May, hyakimlik of Ashgabat has introduced restriction on car movement under the pretext of ‘ecological campaign’. Between 10th and 25th of May, movement of private cars has restricted in main part of the city, only vehicles that serves for the public and vehicles of diplomatic missions has allowed. Semi-private news agency Orient reported[21] that the roads of Ashgabat were open to all vehicles between 7-9 a.m. and between 5-9 p.m. during the period of ‘ecological campaign.’ The agency also published the map of the blocked roads, that map shows that not all the roads were blocked. The news reports chain about the new regulation has produced another disinformation. On 11th of May, Turkmenistan Chronicles reported that taxi drivers had increased the price by 2-3 times during that days[22]. This report has reflected to Eurasianet’s weekly briefing[23] not as taxi drivers but ‘drivers of overcrowded buses.’ The publication also wrote that the roads were ‘blocked off to all vehicles other than public transport and taxis’ as it is not fact. This weekly briefing used RFE/RL’s Turkmen service’s report[24] on the damage of these restrictions to the movement of ambulances. As the restrictions do not include the vehicles on public service, this report keeps its ambiguity, and it is problematic to suggest these restrictions as a cause of ambulance delay, and creates illusion as if there is not any problem in ambulance movement in normal days by ignoring the problems in healthcare system of Turkmenistan.
May gave another field for disinformation campaign about Turkmenistan. This time it is not about the restrictions or bans, but it was about the Order. On 29th of May, RFE/RL’s Turkmen service reported[25] that ‘senior male Turkmen officials and managers of major private companies have been ordered to shave their heads’ after the death of Berdimuhamedov’s father. To understand whether this information is real or fake one needs only to have a look to the daily state news program “Watan Habarlary”[26]. State News Agency of Turkmenistan published the report regarding the death of President’s father on 18th of April, and the RFE/RL’s report says that ‘the order lasts for 40 days.’ Despite this ‘order’ Turkmen male officials appeared with not-shaved head on the “Watan Habarlary” between 18th of April and 29th of May. There are two options; officials may have denied the order or the RFE/RL’s information is not real. As Turkmenistan being a country where ‘political rights and civil liberties are almost completely denied in practice’[27], I would argue that the officials do not have right to deny the order, and the RFE/RL’s report is not based on real information. This disinformation was used by Kaktus Media[28] and Milliyet[29] disinformation has not spread to major news outlets, but has spread on social media because of its “exoticness.”
On the first day of June, Turkish online publication GZT, owned by Albayrak Media Group, has published video[30] about Turkmenistan. According to the video, presented by GZT’s Eurasia editor Nazgul Kenzhetay, Turkmen citizens under 30 are not allowed to go abroad, and women are banned from using a car and wearing trousers by the government. These arguments are not real. One can see lots of Turkmen young people studying and working abroad, and women with trousers in the Ashgabat. Driving schools accepts women participants and there are women who drive a car in the country. The video has viewed more than 1 million totally on YouTube and on Instagram.
Failed efforts of creating hero
Turkmenistan’s pandemic illusion, economic hardship and the changes in Constitution without a referendum led to the rise of protests Turkmens living in Turkey, Cyprus and United States. During one of the protests that was organized in Istanbul of Turkey on 19th of July, several activists were detained by Turkish police. According to the RFE/RL report[31], most of the detained Turkmens were freed in approximately five hours except Dursoltan Taganova. After three months of detention center, Taganova was freed on 13th of October, a day after of the common statement of 11 human rights organization. During the second half of October 2020, RFE/RL published several reports about Taganova. On 26th of October, RFE/RL reported[32] that the pressure of Turkmen government on Taganova’s relatives had been rising, and added that the Turkmen police forced them to make a statement in front of camera by naming Taganova as a “traitor.” Three days after, RFE/RL has published another news report[33] about Taganova with “Turkmen Tihanovskaya” on its headline.
According to this report, local administration of Lebap region had started smear campaign against Taganova among the state workers and public organizations. RFE/RL stated that ‘Taganova, like Tihanovskaya, wants to start protest demonstrations among the people’ by citing school teacher who was a source of outlet’s correspondent. A day after, RFE/RL published the interview[34] with Taganova by asking her opinion about ‘Turkmen authorities comparing her with Tihanovskaya’. Taganova commented that this comparison is ‘big mistake’ by saying that she ‘did not participated in the elections’ and her ‘activism is a small contribution to the efforts of’ of Turkmen people. On 3rd of November 2020, RFE/RL’s Turkmen service published another article, authored by Farangis Najibullah, using the ‘Turkmenistan’s Tsikhanouskaya’ on the headline despite the above-mentioned disagreement of Taganova. One may ask the reason RFE/RL’s Turkmen service’s continued usage of Tsikhanovskaya likening of Dursoltan Taganova although she was not agreeing with it. Let’s trace back to the initial source of this statement. Azatlyk used school teacher as a source of its correspondent, then they asked it from Taganova, despite her disapproval Azatlyk has used this comparison again on the headline. In the last article Najubullah with her own words stated that ‘like Tsikhanouskaya, the Turkmen political activist [Taganova] wants a new, democratic government to come to power in Ashgabat through a free and fair election.’ Is not this acknowledgment and approval of so-called comparison of ‘Turkmen officials’ by RFE/RL? Or, could it be the hero creation efforts the media outlet? Well, the answers for these questions will remain in the ambiguity as the sources, if there any, were anonymous.
Conclusion
The analyze and production process of above-mentioned media materials prove that countries, in this case Turkmenistan, with lack of press freedom are vulnerable towards the disinformation. One can say that under the oppressive governing these types of disinformation is inevitable and Turkmenistan should implement more strategies to give place for freer media in order not to be a part of any disinformation. In this regard, media outlets have responsibility, as much as governments have, in promoting journalism and news reporting based on facts rather than fabricated truth for the sake of click-bait and “exoticness.”
For the conclusion, there are two main handicaps which can open room for possible disinformation about Turkmenistan in global media. Firstly, as there is not any possibility for third parts to fact-check the new, local reporters of ‘independent media outlets’ may report fake information, or they can create one by citing anonymous sources in order to create fake sensation. Secondly, mainstream media outlets may pull out information from initial source and falsely interpret it. In both case it can create a disinformation bubble as it was in above-mentioned situations. Despite the fact that all Central Asian countries were the part of Soviet Union, each of them is unique with its local dynamics, and governing manners can be differentiating. In this context, it is important to analyze news from Turkmenistan considering the local dynamics of the country. For instance, to what extent can people from the rural side of the country where independent Russian/Belarusian tv channels are not streaming know about the importance of Tihanovskaya? Or, how can government officials not shave their head after the President’s Order in Turkmenistan? These questions are as absurd as the regulations in the country are. I want to suggest to Central Asia editors of media outlets to analyze the initial source of every news about Turkmenistan, and to look what Turkmen language social media says and reacts to the initial news. As the government agenda is daily propagated in “Watan habarlary,” editors should have a look to them in order to understand some details visually. Along with independent journalism, disinformation damages also the belief of Turkmen people to more freer media that would also lead to more democratic country.
[1] https://rsf.org/en/turkmenistan
[2] https://rsf.org/en/turkmenistan
[3] https://freedomhouse.org/country/turkmenistan/freedom-world/2021
[4] https://cabar.asia/en/how-turkmenistan-s-media-works-or-doesn-t
[5] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/30510309.html
[6] https://web.archive.org/web/20200402020330/https://rsf.org/en/news/coronavirus-limits-turkmenistan
[7] https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/03/31/824611607/turkmenistan-has-banned-use-of-the-word-coronavirus?t=1622994890861
[8] https://abcnews.go.com/International/turkmenistan-bans-word-coronavirus-report/story?id=69914073
[9] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/coronavirus-turkmenistan-ban-masks-word-a9438266.html
[10] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-turkmenistan-bans-word-coronavirus-arrest/
[11] https://www.cnet.com/health/turkmenistan-fights-covid-19-by-banning-the-word-coronavirus/
[12] https://eurasianet.org/perspectives-turkmenistan-has-not-banned-coronavirus
[13] https://thediplomat.com/2020/04/did-turkmenistan-really-ban-the-word-coronavirus/
[14] https://rsf.org/en/news/coronavirus-limits-turkmenistan
[15] https://tdh.gov.tm/ru/post/21843/prezidenty-turkmenistana-i-uzbekistana-obsudili-po-telefonu-prioritety-dialoga-i-obmenyalis-pozdravleniyami-po-sluchayu-novruza
[16] https://tdh.gov.tm/ru/post/21909/turkmenistan-prodolzhaet-vyvozit-svoikh-grazhdan-iz-za-rubezha-v-svyazi-s-pandemiei-koronavirusa
[17] https://en.turkmen.news/human-rights/turkmenistan-man-gets-four-year-prison-term-for-reposting-photo-of-who-delegation/
[18] https://rsf.org/en/news/four-year-jail-term-independent-websites-correspondent-turkmenistan
[19] https://turkmen.news/human-rights/predstavitel-obse-po-svobode-smi-na-vstreche-s-poslom-turkmenistana-zaprosila-informatsiyu-o-dele-nurgeldy-halykova/
[20] https://turkmen.news/human-rights/freedom-to-halykov/
[21] https://orient.tm/ru/post/27557/gde-mozhno-proehat-v-ashhabade-na-lichnom-transporte-vo-vremya-ekoakcii
[22] https://www.hronikatm.com/2021/05/ashgabat-roadblocks/
[23] https://eurasianet.org/turkmenistan-tatar-sauce
[24] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/31249267.html
[25] https://www.rferl.org/a/turkmenistan-mourning-president-father/31280146.html
[26] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC89qzYVCh6y1sUq5_JtcoXA
[27] https://freedomhouse.org/country/turkmenistan/freedom-world/2021
[28]https://kaktus.media/doc/439419_v_tyrkmenistane_chinovnikov_obiazali_pobrit_golovy_v_pamiat_o_smerti_otca_prezidenta.html
[29] https://www.milliyet.com.tr/dunya/turkmenistan-lideri-babasi-olunce-emir-verdi-saclarinizi-kesin-6519103
[30] https://youtu.be/aHyju3F4MNI
[31] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/30888869.html
[32] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/30913364.html
[33] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/30919424.html
[34] https://rus.azathabar.com/a/30921698.html