Turkey bans photo-sharing service for insulting Ataturk

You're not a proper social media application, it seems, until you've been banned by a humourless, censorious government. That's the upside for Slide today, the Web 2.0 outfit whose popular photo-sharing application is stamped onto so many blogs, MySpace and Facebook profile pages. According to the Slide Blog, the application has been blocked by the Turkish Government for "harboring pictures and articles that are considered to be insulting to [the republic's founder] Ataturk."

Slide is trying to reassure its Turkish hosts that it has nothing against Attaturk as it tries to find a remedy to get the application running again for its Turkish users. The problem is that Slide has no idea what the offending material is. Slide's general counsel John Duncan told Reuters that Slide never received formal notice of the action against the company, nor has it received the details of a court order that effectively shut down the service. In the meantime, Turkish Telecom had complied with the court's order.

As the company notes, Slide is in fine company as the latest Web 2.0 phenomenon to be banned by jittery government officials. As it says in its blog, "Slide joins several other popular web services such as YouTube, Facebook and MySpace that have been banned in various countries (including Turkey, Pakistan, China and the UAE) for user-generated content".

Just how big a deal is losing Turkey for a Web 2.0 start-up? Pretty significant. Facebook recently revealed usership by country and found Turkey in the top five, ahead of France, where other social networks dominate.

Comments

[Can Okar]

Mr Warner,

There is a subtle but important distinction as to who is responsible for the banning of slide in Turkey. It is not the Government, rather it was the Criminal Court in a very small town outside of Denizli.

The problem here is that Turkish law, already fairly censorious when it comes to questioning of territorial indivisibility or of Turkey's founding leader, Ataturk, has no coherent understanding of the internet. It is certainly not alone in this but this lack of legislation, combined with a patchy position on freedom-of-speech has led to use of the sites mentioned above being stopped within Turkey's borders.

How does this happen? Some person who finds something offensive on the internet generally goes to a lawyer who specialises in this kind of case and shares their ideology. They file a complaint, which is taken to a Criminal Court, usually one that has a judge who is likely to accept and agree with the case in hand. A judgement is made to "shut" that site, with the language emanating from some decisions indicating that the legal position is to actually shut youtube or slide. Given that this can't be done, access from Turkey is denied.

Two things need to happen for this to stop: legislation which understands the nature of the internet and slander/libel therein and an overhaul of freedom of speech laws, particularly concerning Turkey's early history.

Don't hold your breath.

Yours,

Can Okar

[Robert]

Is this the same Turkey that is seeking admission to the EU?
Surely this indicates that it is still a repressive state without the freedom of speech etc we would expect from an applying country.
Let this be a warning to the people considering there membership.

[Frank from Centerport]

The present government is really not all that concerned with "insults" of Ataturk, the military,the culture, the history etc etc They are slowly and methodically changing Turkey into an Islamic Republic.

[Paolo]

Still a long way to go for Turkey. This is a country where employers can ask you not to join a political party or face losing your job!
A bit of a third world, unfortunately.

[Geroges]

Ataturk would be raging mad about those that use his name to serve their viscous attempts to make turkey appear like a medieval state where "judges" censor Turkish citizens rights to access websites of their choice to share their culture, and participating on the international cultural, and critical web-exchange. Turkey is not a third world country nor is it an Islamic Republic. But it is some western Europeans wishful thinking patterns that serves their plan to keep the image of the bad turks fluttering in the wind. Like they did with the post communist eastern block countries. Xenophobia rules all conservative minds, feeding their wallets and staining our earth with blood.

[Orhan]

Paolo: You are too far away from reality, and too much into BS! No one asks no one about their political affiliation in Turkiye. Don't know where you from, but Turkiye is a fine Asian country.. So it is very free, unlike most European countries where expressing oneself can be a problem! Oh, except for traitors of course! But that's the same everywhere as far as I know!

Frank: You got it right. But they won't succeed.

Can bey!: Good thing you can speak English, and you love to be loved apparently by our foreign friends! What you call 'early history' is THE history for Turkiye by the way! So, if some mean freaks out there can be respectful as expected from any normal being, things will work out fine for everyone. And there is nothing wrong with our judges by the way. If the company is serious, they'll get personal info on the freaks, hence those people will be scared to act as cowards as they really are, and try to insult a dead great leader!

Chears everyone

[REalistic]

Ataturk is, with Kennedy and maybe Linkoln and Churchill, one of the most important figures of our time.

I am a german national, born in a german family with all german ancesters - so Iam not turkish, but you have to understand that, if you go on the streets in the US and screem "BUSH IS BAD", for not saying anything else, you will get arrested. the same will happen in England and in most places. And Bush, Blair or Brown by no means are people with positive influence on our lifes - so for me it is perfectly understandable that Turkey protects the ONE person who really managed to make a difference and change a nation influenced by arabic culture to a secular state.

Thank you

[Amused in the USA]

Realistic:

I'm not sure who told you that, but you have to accept this: you can say any kind of insulting, horrific thing about Bush you want in the US. For a photographic expose, see http://www.Zombietime.com for what happens nearly every week in Berkeley, California (with the caveat that Berkeley isn't exactly 'normal' for the US, but it does show how far you can go without being arrested).

You can also call George Washington a horrible slaver, Abraham Lincoln a cruel, evil tyrant, and John F. Kennedy a drug-addled, sex crazed son-of-a-bootlegger. And strangely enough, all you'll get is dirty looks (and an occasional argument).

I'm not sure where you get your ideas, but in this particular case, you're very, very wrong.

[Miguel]

The postings by ORHAN and REALISTIC chillingly illustrate how serious the problem of Turkish nationalism is.

[realist]

to Can Okar,

Are you kurdish?In this case I understand. because for you anything against Turkey is just about good enough.

And by the way, Kurdish people in Germany do cause a lot of trouble and are generally disrespectful towards turkish history and specially ATATURK. Because they are trying to do the same as Iasrael.

But when everything is said and done, as long as people dont respect the differences between one and another, there will be no peace.

[Somewhat less Amused in the USA]

Miguel, you said:

"...as long as people dont respect the differences between one and another, there will be no peace."

I assume you mean *all* differences? Like the differences between Turks and say, Greeks (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Turkish_War_%281919-1922%29)? Or perhaps between Turks and Armenians (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish-Armenian_War)? Or, of course, between Turks and Kurds (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurds_in_Turkey#Kurdish_Rebellions_in_Turkey).

I will give Mustafa Kamal this: he brought Turkey out of the dark ages, and single-handedly turned the nation into a real, modern constitutional republic, a nation whose brilliant success the Islamists are still gnashing their teeth in frustration over. He single-handedly led the nation out of the bondage of the Ottomans, and is to be commended for that part of his legacy.

But he was no saint. He was a genius, but no saint. And certainly, he was not a deity - some god - that any perceived slight of his reputation should drive his worshipers into frothy paroxysms of vengeful, righteous religious anger.

[Somewhat less Amused in the USA]

Oops - sorry, Miguel.

That reply was to REALIST.

My sincere apologies, Miguel.