IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/iprjir/213997.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Internet censorship in Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Akgül, Mustafa
  • Kırlıdoğ, Melih

Abstract

Turkey passed an internet censorship law in 2007 with the declared objective of protecting families and minors (Akdeniz, 2010). It established a unit within the regulator BTK (Information and Communication Technologies Authority) responsible for imposing bans and blocks on websites based on nine catalogue crimes defined by other national laws (Akgül 2008, 2009a, 2009b). As of May 2015, 80,000 websites were banned based on civil code related complaints and intellectual property rights violations, reports the independent website Engelliweb. Blocking decisions rendered by penal courts are enforced even when they are based on grounds other that the nine catalogue crimes - such as terrorism, organised crime and crime against the state. Passed in parliament while ignoring the pleas of NGOs and of the internet sector, the Internet Law No. 5651 has since been used to temporarily ban popular platforms such as Blogger, Last.fm, Vimeo, Wordpress and YouTube. At the same time, some blocking decisions by the courts (e.g., Google and Facebook) were not enforced by the authorities. Since its introduction, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that Law No. 5651 (Council of Europe, 2011) is against the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, 2013). This article provides an overview of internet censorship and its social background in Turkey.

Suggested Citation

  • Akgül, Mustafa & Kırlıdoğ, Melih, 2015. "Internet censorship in Turkey," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 4(2), pages 1-22.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iprjir:213997
    DOI: 10.14763/2015.2.366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/213997/1/IntPolRev-2015-2-366.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.14763/2015.2.366?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean-Loup Richet, 2013. "Overt censorship: a fatal mistake?," Post-Print hal-02187746, HAL.
    2. Wright, Joss & Breindl, Yana, 2013. "Internet filtering trends in liberal democracies: French and German regulatory debates," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 2(2), pages 1-10.
    3. King, Gary & Pan, Jennifer & Roberts, Margaret E., 2013. "How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 326-343, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zagidullin, Marat & Aziz, Nergis & Kozhakhmet, Sanat, 2021. "Government policies and attitudes to social media use among users in Turkey: The role of awareness of policies, political involvement, online trust, and party identification," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    2. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.
    3. Lai, Weizheng, 2024. "The effect of education on voter turnout in China's rural elections," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 230-247.
    4. Guriev, Sergei & Treisman, Daniel, 2020. "A theory of informational autocracy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    5. Zhiming Cheng & Russell Smyth, 2016. "Why Give it Away When You Need it Yourself? Understanding Public Support for Foreign Aid in China," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 53-71, January.
    6. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5744igqofr9qr9hjd2eiomr7qc is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Sergei Guriev & Daniel Treisman, 2020. "The Popularity of Authoritarian Leaders: A cross-national investigation," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03878626, HAL.
    8. Erin Baggott Carter & Brett L. Carter, 2021. "Propaganda and Protest in Autocracies," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(5), pages 919-949, May.
    9. Yue Wu, 2024. "Creation, Consumption, and Control of Sensitive Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 885-902, July.
    10. Zhang, Weidong & Zuo, Na & He, Wu & Li, Songtao & Yu, Lu, 2021. "Factors influencing the use of artificial intelligence in government: Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    11. Xiaojun Li & Dingding Chen, 2021. "Public opinion, international reputation, and audience costs in an authoritarian regime," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(5), pages 543-560, September.
    12. Emilie Frenkiel & Anna Shpakovskaya, 2019. "The Evolution of Representative Claim-Making by the Chinese Communist Party: From Mao to Xi (1949–2019)," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 208-219.
    13. Sergei Guriev & Nikita Melnikov & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2021. "3G Internet and Confidence in Government," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2533-2613.
    14. Caroline Schlaufer & Marina Pilkina & Tatiana Chalaya & Tatiana Khaynatskaya & Tatiana Voronova & Aleksandra Pozhivotko, 2022. "How do civil society organizations communicate in an authoritarian setting? A narrative analysis of the Russian waste management debate," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 730-751, November.
    15. Daron Acemoglu & Tarek A. Hassan & Ahmed Tahoun, 2018. "The Power of the Street: Evidence from Egypt’s Arab Spring," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(1), pages 1-42.
    16. Xiukang Wang, 2022. "Managing Land Carrying Capacity: Key to Achieving Sustainable Production Systems for Food Security," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, March.
    17. James Evans, 2022. "From Text Signals to Simulations: A Review and Complement to Text as Data by Grimmer, Roberts & Stewart (PUP 2022)," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 51(4), pages 1868-1885, November.
    18. John Chung-En Liu & Huijing Huang & Jingyi Ma, 2019. "Understanding China’s environmental challenges: lessons from documentaries," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(2), pages 151-158, June.
    19. Iacus Stefano M. & Salini Silvia & Siletti Elena & Porro Giuseppe, 2020. "Controlling for Selection Bias in Social Media Indicators through Official Statistics: a Proposal," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 36(2), pages 315-338, June.
    20. Brian Knight & Ana Tribin, 2022. "Opposition Media, State Censorship, and Political Accountability: Evidence from Chavez’s Venezuela," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(2), pages 455-487.
    21. Stephen A Meserve & Daniel Pemstein, 2020. "Terrorism and internet censorship," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 752-763, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:iprjir:213997. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://policyreview.info/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.