Surface reading

Al Jazeera is producing a documentary titled "Erdogan: The Making of Modern Turkiye," featuring an interview with Turkish President Erdogan. The interview will cover his foreign policy, Turkey's involvement in regional conflicts, and the 25-year tenure of the AK Party (Erdogan's party) in power.

Framing and omissions

The title, "Erdogan: The Making of Modern Turkiye," frames President Erdogan as the singular, indispensable architect of the nation's contemporary identity and progress. The loaded verb "Making" attributes a foundational, almost creative, role to him, implying that "modern Turkiye" is largely a product of his vision and leadership. This narrative implicitly diminishes or omits the contributions of other historical figures, political movements, economic forces, or societal shifts that have shaped Turkey over its long history. It also sidesteps any potential criticisms, negative consequences, or divisions that might have arisen during his extensive period in power.

The description highlights "foreign policy" and "regional conflicts," areas where Turkey under Erdogan has been highly active and often controversial (e.g., in Syria, Libya, the Eastern Mediterranean, or Nagorno-Karabakh). Presenting this as an "interview" within a "documentary" format, especially given the flattering title, suggests an opportunity for Erdogan to present his preferred narrative on these complex and often contentious interventions without necessarily facing rigorous scrutiny. The focus on "25 years of AK Party rule" further solidifies the idea of a long-term, transformative period directly attributable to him and his party, emphasizing longevity and stability under his command, while omitting any challenges to democratic norms or human rights during this period.

A rival outlet, particularly one critical of Erdogan's rule, might frame the content differently, perhaps titling it: "Erdogan's Turkiye: Two Decades of Power Consolidation and Regional Intervention," or "Turkey Under Erdogan: A Divisive Legacy of Change." Such a rival would likely emphasize internal dissent, economic challenges, and the perceived erosion of democratic institutions rather than a narrative of singular creation.

Audience and incentive

This message serves multiple audiences: - Domestic Turkish audience: The primary aim is to reinforce Erdogan's image as a strong, visionary, and irreplaceable leader who has built modern Turkey. This bolsters his political standing, consolidates his base, and counters domestic opposition by showcasing a narrative of national achievement and strength under his stewardship. - Regional audience (MENA): Al Jazeera is a significant media platform in the Middle East and North Africa. This content allows Turkey to project an image of a powerful, stable regional player under decisive leadership, potentially influencing regional perceptions of Turkey's role and its foreign policy agenda, appealing to audiences that might admire strong leadership or pan-Islamic solidarity. - International policymakers and opinion shapers: This provides a platform for Erdogan to directly communicate Turkey's official stances on foreign policy and regional conflicts, attempting to shape global perceptions, justify actions, and project an image of a confident, independent nation. - Platform (Al Jazeera): The incentive is to secure a high-profile interview with a major world leader, enhancing its credibility and viewership. As a Qatari state-funded entity, Al Jazeera's editorial choices sometimes align with geopolitical interests shared by Turkey, making it a suitable platform for such a narrative.

What would falsify this framing

• The documentary content itself featuring a highly critical interviewer who thoroughly challenges Erdogan's claims on domestic achievements, democratic governance, or foreign policy outcomes, rather than allowing him to present an unvarnished narrative.
• Independent historical scholarship or public opinion data widely disproving the notion that Erdogan is the sole or primary architect of "modern Turkiye," highlighting instead the significant contributions of prior leaders, institutions, or societal movements, or demonstrating that aspects of his rule have hindered rather than helped "modernization."
• Widespread, credible reports or analyses demonstrating significant negative impacts of Erdogan's "25 years of AK Party rule" on specific aspects of Turkish society, economy, or democratic institutions that contradict a narrative of positive "making."
• Public or international outcry that universally condemns Turkey's foreign policy and regional conflict engagements as destabilizing or illegitimate, directly contradicting any positive spin Erdogan might offer.