The dossier allegedly contained documents pertaining to misappropriation of army funds by Gen. Büyükanıt's wife. Erdoğan even mentioned the name of Adm. İlhami Erdil, who used to be chief of the navy and is now serving time in prison for his wife's extravagance.  

An unbelievable story, isn't it?

Regardless of its lack of logic, the story, which was published in a newspaper of very small circulation, found its way to one of the papers belonging to the largest media group in our country. The daily Vatan reprinted the story and gave it a prominent place on its front page.

This is even more unbelievable.

We are talking about Turkey. As we know, Turkey is a democratic country. The relationship between the prime minister and his chief of General Staff may be problematic, but it cannot be as problematic as is envisaged by the blackmail story. Nobody in his right mind would think that a politician could attempt to blackmail an officer and that the officer would remain silent afterwards.

This is utter nonsense.

When the story was reprinted by one of the dailies belonging to the Doğan Media Group (DMG), it was first vehemently denied and emphatically denied by the Prime Minister's Office and later by the Office of the Chief of General Staff.

Something very odd has been happening in the Turkish press recently. The unbelievable news item in Vatan isn't the only example of refutable stories. The daily Hürriyet, the flagship of DMG, published a banner story last week informing the public of a new attempt by the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) government to ban alcoholic beverages. The title announced that drinking a glass of rakı, a traditional Turkish alcoholic beverage, would no longer be possible following the enactment of a new law that went into effect last weekend.

This was of course another reminder of the "hidden agenda" of the AK Party government that DMG newspapers claim exists. The reporters raid government buildings and hospitals to find lady employees with headscarves, and when they find some, they dedicate the entire front page to the story. Many of their findings were used by the chief prosecutor when he applied to the Constitutional Court to open a closure case against the AK Party.

The very same day the head of the organization for promoting wine and other alcoholic beverages in Turkey refuted the news item, saying that the new law targets small markets or corner kiosks serving alcoholic beverages in glasses from open bottles and only prohibits such "over-the-counter" drinking.

No cause for alarm, the head of organization said.

The day we found out that there was no cause for alarm, international media gave precious space to the new regulation that narrows the limits of alcoholic beverage consumption in Turkey. The best example of the misfired coverage in international media is Britain's Guardian. A piece appeared by the title "New alcohol law prompts fears for Turkish bar trade" and was written by the Guardian's correspondent in İstanbul, Robert Tate.

Tate summarized what he read in the daily Hürriyet, which twisted the meaning of the law as follows: "The Islamist credentials of Turkey's conservative-run government have come under renewed scrutiny over a new law on alcohol which critics claim could stop bars and restaurants from selling drinks by the glass. The regulation, which came into force this week, bars the sale of alcoholic beverages and cigarettes outside their original packaging. Offenders could face maximum fines of more than 4,000 pounds."

I have cause for alarm because the false accusations and misinformation in some media outlets threatens the credibility of my trade, journalism. The history of the media is beset by examples of misinformation, but many of them occurred during extraordinary circumstances, such as war or upheavals. We don't have a war going on, but false news items are rampant in our media.

Why? Why isn't even the prime minister or chief of General Staff immune from misinformation attempts? What is the reason for blurring the political climate with unfounded claims and lies?

Lousy journalism is one answer to all those questions. The people who prepare papers for publication don't have enough education to understand the intricacies of the stories they cover; or they are experienced enough to understand the real meaning of the story, but prefer to stretch the meaning to get attention. Both are prone to lousy journalism.

But in the case of sparking a fight between the civilian leader of the country and the military leader or in the case of turning the meaning of a recently enacted law into something not meant by the legislators, the problem is completely different. We cannot simply label the situation lousy journalism.

There is no doubt there is an undeclared war in Turkey today, but the war isn't between different forces of the state, but between civil politics and certain media outlets.

It is a dirty war without respect for code of conduct.