SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Etkileşim / 2026 / Sayı: 17

A Normative Framework Proposal for Ideal Health Journalism in Türkiye

Türkiye’de İdeal Sağlık Yayıncılığı İçin Normatif Bir Çerçeve Önerisi

Erkan Yüksel(ANADOLU ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İLETİŞİM BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0003-2487-3589
Journal
Etkileşim
Pages
12–36
Publication Date
2026-04-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal a strong stakeholder consensus on the principles of evidence-based content, non-maleficence, transparent disclosure of conflicts of interest, and clear, accessible language.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study employs a mixed methods design to define ideal health journalism in Türkiye and to propose a practicable normative framework.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Between May and October 2024, 29 semi-structured interviews were conducted with three key stakeholder groups (media, health, and academia), followed by a survey administered to 67 participants.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal a strong stakeholder consensus on the principles of evidence-based content, non-maleficence, transparent disclosure of conflicts of interest, and clear, accessible language.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sağlık haberciliği · sağlık muhabirliği · sağlık editörlüğü

Abstract

This study employs a mixed methods design to define ideal health journalism in Türkiye and to propose a practicable normative framework. Between May and October 2024, 29 semi-structured interviews were conducted with three key stakeholder groups (media, health, and academia), followed by a survey administered to 67 participants. The findings reveal a strong stakeholder consensus on the principles of evidence-based content, non-maleficence, transparent disclosure of conflicts of interest, and clear, accessible language. Regarding visual usage, privacy and ethical proportionality were prominent themes; at the organisational level, a health editorship system and specialized health literacy education for reporters were identified as foundational requirements. Regarding oversight, a divergence exists between media professionals’ preference for self-regulation and health professionals’ demand for public oversight, situating the debate within the freedom of expression–public interest balance. By offering a model addressing newsroom operations, educational curricula, and oversight criteria, this study argues that content quality can be strengthened in the short term, and public trust and public health outcomes in the medium term.

Özet

Türkiye’de ideal sağlık yayıncılığını tanımlamak ve uygulanabilir bir normatif çerçeve önermek amacıyla yürütülen bu çalışma, karma yöntem desenine dayanmaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında Mayıs-Ekim 2024 tarihleri arasında üç temel paydaş grubuyla (medya, sağlık, akademi) 29 yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme yapılmış, ardından 67 katılımcıya anket uygulanmıştır. Bulgular kanıta dayalılık, zarar vermeme, çıkar çatışması şeffaflığı ve anlaşılır dil ilkelerinde güçlü bir paydaş uzlaşısını ortaya koymaktadır. Görsel kullanımında mahremiyet ve etik ölçülülük öne çıkarken; kurumsal düzeyde sağlık editörlüğü sistemi ve muhabirler için özelleşmiş sağlık okuryazarlığı eğitimi temel gereklilik olarak belirlenmiştir. Denetim boyutunda ise medya profesyonellerinin özdenetim tercihi ile sağlık profesyonellerinin kamusal denetim talebi arasındaki ayrışma, ifade özgürlüğü-kamu yararı dengesinde konumlanmaktadır. Çalışma, haber odası işleyişi, eğitim müfredatı ve denetim kriterlerine yönelik sunduğu bu modelle; kısa vadede içerik kalitesinin, orta vadede ise toplumsal güven ve halk sağlığı çıktılarının güçlendirilebileceğini savunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yüksel, E. (2026). A Normative Framework Proposal for Ideal Health Journalism in Türkiye. Etkileşim, Sayı: 17, 12–36. https://doi.org/10.32739/etkilesim.2026.9.17.329

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (50)

  1. Abbas, J., Wang, D., Su, Z., & Ziapour, A. (2021). The role of social media in the advent of COVID-19 pandemic: Crisis management, mental health challenges and implications. Risk management and healthcare policy, 14, 1917-1932. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S284313
  2. Anwar, A., Malik, M., Raees, V., & Anwar, A. (2020). Role of mass media and public health communications in the COVID-19 pandemic. Cureus, 12(9), e10453. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.10453
  3. Ardıç Çobaner, A., Alkan, N., & Dural Tasouji, C. (2022). Evaluation of digital news about the COVID-19 vaccine Turkovac in terms of health reporting criteria. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 39, 24-43. https://doi.org/10.31123/akil.1143278
  4. Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ). (2021a). Covering health care responsibly. https://healthjournalism.org
  5. (2021b). Checklist for judging the quality of medical and health news stories. Association of Health Care Journalists https://healthjournalism.org/resources-tips-details.php?id=33 adresinden erişilmiştir.
  6. (tarih yok). Statement of principles of the Association of Health Care Journalists. https://healthjournalism.org/about/principles-and-policies/statement-of-principles-of-the-association-of-health-care-journalists adresinden erişilmiştir.
  7. Atak, M., & Yüksel, E. (Ed.). (2025). Sağlık haberciliği. Sağlık Bakanlığı Yayınları. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389363552_Saglik_Haberciligi_Kilavuzu adresinden erişilmiştir.
  8. Ayaz, F. (2020). Ticarileşmenin sağlık haberciliği içeriğine etkisi: Bir model önerisi (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2019). The CDC Clear Communication Index: A tool for developing and assessing communication products (2nd ed.). U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/ccindex/index.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
  10. (2024, 20 Kasım). Crisis & Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) Manual. https://www.cdc.gov/cerc/php/cerc-manual/index.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
  11. Eğitim ve Sağlık Muhabirleri Derneği (ESAM). (tarih yok). Etik kurallar. https://esamder.org.tr/gallery-post/#:~:text=1.,kullan%C4%B1m%C4%B1%20i%C3%A7in%20gerekli%20%C3%A7abay%C4%B1%20harcar.
  12. Feinberg, I., O’Connor, M. H., Khader, S., Nyman, A. L., & Eriksen, M. P. (2023). Creating understandable and actionable COVID-19 health messaging for refugee, immigrant, and migrant communities. Healthcare, 11 (8), 1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11081098
  13. Health Feedback. (tarih yok). About. https://healthfeedback.org/about adresinden erişilmiştir.
  14. HealthNewsReview.org (HNR). (2020). 10 criteria we use to review health news stories. https://www.healthnewsreview.org/review-criteria adresinden erişilmiştir.
  15. Hinnant, A., Len-Ríos, M. E., & Oh, H. J. (2012). Are health journalists’ practices tied to their perceptions of roles? An Attribution and Expectancy-Value Approach. Health Communication, 27(3), 234-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.578331
  16. İrvan, S. (2017, Eylül 27). Gazetecilik etiği: Sağlık haberciliği. https://suleymanirvan.blogspot.com/2017/09/gazetecilik-etigi-saglik-haberciligi.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
  17. Kaya, A. (2016). Sağlık konulu yayıncılıkta etik ilkeler (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
  18. Kaya, A., Yüksel, A. E., & Öğüt, P. (2011). Sağlık haberlerinde “mucize tedaviler”. Selçuk iletişim, 7(1), 49-64.
  19. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2007). Gazeteciliğin esasları (S. Göktaş, Çev.). ODTÜ Geliştirme Vakfı Yayıncılık.
  20. Kuş, O., & Öztürk, İ. D. (2022). COVID-19, misinformation and communication studies: A systematic review of the infodemic. Connectist: Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, 62, 67-90. https://doi.org/10.26650/CONNECTIST2022-1028131
  21. Larsson, A., Oxman, A. D., Carling, C. L., & Herrin, J. (2003). Medical messages in the media – Barriers and solutions to improving medical journalism. Health Expectations, 6(4), 323-331. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1369-7625.2003.00228.x
  22. Leask, J., Hooker, C., & King, C. (2010). Media coverage of health issues and how to work more effectively with journalists: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health, 10, Article 535. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-535
  23. Lewis, M., Orrock, P., & Myers, S. (2010). Uncritical reverence in complementary medicine reporting: Assessing the scientific quality of Australian news media reports. Health Sociology Review, 19 (1), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.5172/hesr.2010.19.1.057
  24. Moynihan, R., Bero, L., Hill, S., Johanson, M., Macdonald, H., Mintezes, B., Rodvin, M. A., Stavdal, A., Stegenga, J., Thombs, B. D., Thornton, H., Vandvik, P. O., Godlee, F. (2019). Pathways to independence: Towards producing and using trustworthy evidence. BMJ, 367, l6576. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337721963_Pathways_to_independence_Towards_producing_and_using_trustworthy_evidence adresinden erişilmiştir.
  25. Moynihan, R., Bero, L., Ross-Degnan, D., Henry, D., Lee, K., Watkins, J., Mah, C., & Soumerai, S. B. (2000). Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications. New England Journal of Medicine, 342(22), 1645-1650. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200006013422206
  26. Moynihan, R., Heath, I., & Henry, D. (2002). Selling sickness: The pharmaceutical industry and disease mongering. BMJ, 324 (7342), 886-891. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7342.886
  27. Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
  28. Öntaş, E., Bahar-Özvarış, Ş., & Şimşek, B. (2024). Creating, publishing, and spreading processes of health-related contents in internet news sites: Evaluation of the opinions of actors in health communication. Frontiers in Public Health, 12, 1370343. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1370343
  29. Özkul, A., & Sezgin, D. (2022). Sağlık haberciliğinde etik dışı pratikler ve ticarileşme eğilimleri. Gazetecilik Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(1), 112–132.
  30. Pakkan Tosun, Ş. (2021). İnfodemik dünya: Sağlık habercilerinin pandemi sürecinde infodemiye ilişkin tespit ve önerileri. İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, 55, 56–79.
  31. Schröder, J. T., & Guenther, L. (2024). Science and health journalism in the digital age and its implications on public trust. K. Walsh-Childers & M. McKinnon (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of science and health journalism içinde (ss. 345-360). Palgrave Macmillan.
  32. Schwitzer, G. (2004). A statement of principles for health care journalists. The American Journal of Bioethics, 4(4), W9–W13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160490908086
  33. . HealthNewsReview.org: Criteria for excellence in health and medical journalism. Virtual Mentor, 9(3), 225–228.https://doi.org/10.1001/virtualmentor.2007.9.3.pmed1-0703
  34. . How do US journalists cover treatments, tests, products and procedures? An evaluation of 500 stories. PLoS Medicine, 5(5), e95. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050095
  35. . The state of health journalism in the US. Kaiser Family Foundation. https://www.kff.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/7858.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  36. . Addressing tensions when popular media and evidence-based care collide. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(3), S3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-13-S3-S3
  37. Shaikh, S., Nadeem, A., Musharraf, M., & Fazid, S. (2024). Understanding ethics of reporting health related events in media: A qualitative phenomenological study in Karachi and Peshawar. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 40 (3Part-II), 376-381.
  38. Shipman, M. (2022, Eylül 13). Tips for evaluating health news stories. Science communication breakdown. https://sciencecommunicationbreakdown.wordpress.com/2022/09/13/tips-for-evaluating-health-news-stories/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
  39. Sütlaş, M. (2007). Medya için sağlık, sağlık için medya. Bas-Haş Yayınları.
  40. Şentürk Kara, E. (2021). A’dan Z’ye görüşme. Nobel Yayıncılık.
  41. Tinsley, H. E. A., & Weiss, D. J. (2000). Interrater reliability and agreement. H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Ed.), Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling içinde (ss. 95-124). Academic Press.
  42. Türk Tabipleri Birliği (TTB). (2022, Mayıs 26). Sağlık haberciliği ticarileşemez: Sağlık hakkı metalaştırılamaz! Türk Tabipleri Birliği. https://www.ttb.org.tr/haber_goster.php?Guid=3de927e0-dcdf-11ec-9713-4293ec7a83bd adresinden erişilmiştir.
  43. Türkiye Gazeteciler Cemiyeti. (TGC, tarih yok). Türkiye gazetecileri hak ve sorumluluk bildirgesi. Türkiye Gazeteciler Cemiyeti. https://www.tgc.org.tr/bildirgeler/türkiye-gazetecilik-hak-ve-sorumluluk-bildirgesi/bildirge.html adresinden erişilmiştir.
  44. Ünal, R., & Taylan, A. (2017). Sağlık iletişiminde yalan haber–yanlış enformasyon sorunu ve doğrulama platformları. Atatürk İletişim Dergisi, 14, 81–100.
  45. Walsh-Childers, K., Braddock, J., Rabaza, C., & Schwitzer, G. (2016). One step forward, one step back: Changes in news coverage of medical interventions. Health communication, 33(2), 174–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1250706
  46. World Health Organization. (2018, 10 Ocak). Communicating risk in public health emergencies: A WHO guideline for emergency risk communication (ERC) policy and practice. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550208
  47. World Health Organization (WHO). (2020a, 15 Şubat). Munich Security Conference – Speech by WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros adhanom ghebreyesus. https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/munich-security-conference adresinden erişilmiştir.
  48. (2020b, 23 Eylül). Managing the COVID-19 infodemic: Promoting healthy behaviours and mitigating the harm from misinformation and disinformation. https://www.who.int/news/item/23-09-2020-managing-the-covid-19-infodemic-promoting-healthy-behaviours-and-mitigating-the-harm-from-misinformation-and-disinformation
  49. . Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) advice for the public: Mythbusters. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/advice-for-public/myth-busters
  50. Yüksel, E., Kaya, A. Y., Koçak, A., & Aydın, S. (2014). Check up: Sağlık iletişimi. Literatürk Akademi.