The task of the media is to inform the public. The purpose of the media is not to direct public opinion, to create public opinion and to channel it to a certain place.
The media, whether public or private, should accept information, that is, communication and informing, not as an end, but as a tool that contributes to the development of the individual and society. Contributing to the development of the society is one thing, educating and directing the society are two different things.
The purpose of the media is to provide the flow of information to the society and to contribute while providing this. Otherwise, it is not the duty of the media to educate the society and take it in a certain direction. This is unacceptable, whether it is in the form of drawing a direction, directing the society and dragging it in a certain direction, which will manifest as the domination of the opposition politics, the power or in the context of creating its own sphere of influence.
The purpose of the media should not be to act as the spokesperson for public authority or to put itself in the place of public authority. The media is the fourth force, but the media do not represent public opinion. The transformation of the media into a state apparatus moves the media owners, editors and journalists away from the understanding of public service and mediocracy (media democracy) emerges.
Another point to be noted about the purpose of the media is to distinguish well between the concepts of opinion and public opinion. The concepts of opinion and public opinion should not be confused. Failure to discern this exactly harms democracy. The media presents objective information to the benefit of the society and ensures the formation of opinion in the society. Forming public opinion is the activity of directing the society and is different from forming opinion.
If the purpose of the media to provide information and communication turns into educating, judging, directing and creating public opinion, the media assumes the function of schools, the judiciary and other social institutions and can become a great power of the state by taking on the role of directing the public. This is not acceptable in democracies.
Media democracy, which we call mediocracy, disrupts the mechanism, which is balanced with the inalienable rights of individuals, the principle of separation of powers between the three basic powers of the state, legislative, executive and judiciary, and an imbalance may occur in democracy.
The media is not, in itself, an area free of control, nor should it be. The media has duties in terms of both rights and duties as well as freedom and responsibility.
The media is not, and should not be, the representative of the people. The media has to be objective. The media is neither for the state nor for the people; It is neither the representative of the state nor the representative of the people. The media is responsible for presenting the correct information to the society within the framework of the ethical committees of the media and to ensure that an opinion is formed in the society.
The media cannot act purposefully like politicians. It cannot and should not engage in activities such as educating and directing the public. All of these are valid for an ideal media. Today, we observe a process in which the control of the media becomes more difficult, media-state relations become based on interests, the media sometimes tries to educate the public, sometimes the spokesperson of politicians, and sometimes creates public opinion. Sometimes, it is seen that the political power uses the media for their own purposes with economic and political pressures.