Journals / Analytical Politics / 2020 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1

Political Hegemony and Media: A Comparative Analysis of Single-Party Governments in Turkey

Pages
1–17
Publication Date
2020-02-15
DOI
—
🏛️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 comparative analysis shows that the favouring conditions arising as a result of these three factors create hegemonic political parties.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article analyses the conditions under which the political parties who obtain political power as a single government can retain it by ideological and political hegemony instead of coercion.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The factors that affect establishment of hegemony are the existing political setting, the balance of power between political actors such as the government, opposition parties, civilian and military bureaucracy, interest groups and the media and the legal framework of media activities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The comparative analysis shows that the favouring conditions arising as a result of these three factors create hegemonic political parties.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Siyasal Hegemonya · Türk siyasal hayatı · political parties

Abstract

This article analyses the conditions under which the political parties who obtain political power as a single government can retain it by ideological and political hegemony instead of coercion. The factors that affect establishment of hegemony are the existing political setting, the balance of power between political actors such as the government, opposition parties, civilian and military bureaucracy, interest groups and the media and the legal framework of media activities. The analysis is based on the comparative study of single-party governments in Turkey, since the country has recently become a focus of political debate regarding the future of democracy. The comparative analysis shows that the favouring conditions arising as a result of these three factors create hegemonic political parties.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı tek parti iktidarlarının hangi koşullarda medya aracılığı ile siyasal güçlerini siyasal hegemonya aracılığı ile koruduklarını saptamaktır. Bu koşullar; Türkiye’de çok partili yaşama geçildikten sonra serbest seçimlerle iktidara gelen üç siyasal parti olan Demokrat Parti, Anavatan Partisi ve Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi’nin karşılaştırmalı analizi ile saptanmıştır. Analiz sonucunda; mevcut siyasal yapı, siyasal aktörler arasındaki güç dengesi ve medya faaliyetlerinin hukuki çerçevesinin medya üzerinden siyasal hegemonya inşasını şekillendirdiği sonucuna varılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇELENK, A. A., DENİŞ, H. E. (2020). Political Hegemony and Media: A Comparative Analysis of Single-Party Governments in Turkey. Analytical Politics, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 1, 1–17. https://ajindex.com/articles/371518

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. Ahmad, F. (1993)
  2. The Making of Modern Turkey, Taylor&Francis, London. Akşin, S. (2007) Yakın Çağ Türkiye Tarihi 1908-1980,
  3. Kelebek Matbaacılık, İstanbul.
  4. Alemdar, K. & Kaya, R. (1989)
  5. Basında Tekelleşmeler, Mozaik Basım, İstanbul.
  6. Alemdar, K & Uzun, R. (2013)
  7. Herkes İçin Gazetecilik, Tanyeri, Ankara.
  8. Altheide, D.L. (1984) ‘Media Hegemony: A Failure of Perspective’, The Public Opinion Quarterly, vol.48, no.2, pp. 476-490.
  9. Althusser, L. (1971) Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays, Monthly Review Press,
  10. New York. Atılgan, G. (2015) Osmanlı’dan Günümüze Türkiye’de Siyasal Hayat, Yordam Kitap, İstanbul.
  11. Barrett, M. (1991) The Politics of Truth: From Marx to Foucault, Stanford University Press,
  12. California. Block, E. (2013) ‘A Culturalist Approach to Mediatization of Politics: The Age of Media Hegemony’, Communication Theory, vol.23, pp. 259-278.
  13. Buğra, A. & Savaşkan, O. (2015) Türkiye’de Yeni Kapitalizm: Siyaset, Din ve İş Dünyası, İletişim, İstanbul.
  14. Cumhuriyet (1983) ‘Letter to the Prime Minister’, 11 May, 1983.
  15. Dearing, J.W. & Rogers, E.M. (1996)
  16. Agenda-Setting, Sage Publications, London. Eroğul, C. (1990)
  17. Demokrat Parti Tarihi ve İdeolojisi, İmge Kitabevi,
  18. Ankara.
  19. Gramsci, A. (1971)
  20. Selections from Prison Notebooks, Lawrence &Wishart, London. Hale, W. (1993)
  21. Turkish Politics and the Military, Rouledge, London. Hale, W. & Özbudun, E. (2009)
  22. Islamism, Liberalism and Democracy in Turkey: The Case of the AKP, Routledge, London. Heper, M. (1985)
  23. The State Tradition in Turkey, The Eothen Press,
  24. Walkington. Hürriyet (1983) ‘Letter to the Prime Minister’, 11 May, 1983.
  25. İnan, S. (2008) ‘Demokrat Parti Dönemi, 1950-1960’, Yakın Dönem Türk Politik Tarihi, pp.117-145.
  26. Kabacalı, A. (1990) Başlangıçtan Günümüze Türkiye’de Basın Sansürü, Gazeteciler Cemiyeti Yayınları,
  27. İstanbul.
  28. Kahraman, H.B. (2010)
  29. Türk Siyasetinin Yapısal Analizi, Agora Kitaplığı, İstanbul.
  30. Keyman, F. (2014)
  31. İletişim ve Diplomasi, İletişim, Ankara.
  32. Koç, Y.T. (2011) 12 Eylül’den 12 Haziran’a Siyasi Partiler, SETA, Ankara.
  33. Koçoğlu, Y. (1990) ‘1989 Bilançosu Günlük 16 Gazeteye 394 Dava’, İletişim Araştırma Bülteni, vol. 3, p. 10. Lewis, B. (1961)
  34. The Emergence of Modern Turkey, Oxford University Press,
  35. Oxford. Lippmann, W. (1922)
  36. Public Opinion, Mac Millan, New York. McCombs, M. & Shaw, D. (1972) ‘The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media’, The Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 36, no.2, pp. 176-187.
  37. Mecham, R.Q. (2004) ‘From the Ashes of Virtue, A Promise of Light: The Transformation of Political Islam in T