This study applies interpretative journalism, framing theory, and hybrid media theory to examine how independent Turkish journalists strategically use YouTube commentary to navigate restrictive political environments. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach—combining quantitative content analysis of 810 YouTube video titles and qualitative critical discourse analysis of 30 video transcripts from Turkish Journalists Fatih Altaylı, Ruşen Çakır, and Murat Yetkin's YouTube channels—the research identifies distinct stylistic strategies including provocative populism, deliberative analysis, and contextual critique. Findings reveal that negative sentiment and crisis framing dominate headlines, serving both algorithmic visibility and public engagement, yet raising ethical concerns regarding sensationalism and polarization. Ultimately, the study underscores digital commentary journalism's complex role in sustaining democratic discourse under authoritarian pressures, highlighting both adaptive innovation and potential compromises in journalistic integrity.
AkserM.Baybars-HawksB. (2012). Media and democracy in Turkey: Toward a model of neoliberal media autocracy. Middle East Journal of Culture and Communication, 5(3), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1163/18739865-00503011
2.
AkserM.BaybarsB. (2022). Repressed media and illiberal politics in Turkey: The persistence of fear. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 23(1), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2022.2088647
AttonC. (2009). Alternative and citizen journalism. In Wahl-JorgensenK.HanitzschT. (Eds.), The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 265–278). Routledge.
5.
BakerP.GabrielatosC.KhosraviNikM.KrzyżanowskiM.McEneryT.WodakR. (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse & Society, 19(3), 273–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962
6.
BattS. (2021). Interpretive sufficiency: Where evidence in journalism and ethnography meet. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 9(4), 841–850. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1960868
7.
BennettW. L.IyengarS. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x
8.
BlomJ. N.RønlevR.HansenK. R.LjungdalhA. K. (2021). The potentials and pitfalls of interactional speculations by journalists and experts in the media: The case of COVID-19. Journalism Studies, 22(9), 1142–1160. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1925950
9.
BrüggemannM.EngesserS. (2017). Beyond false balance: How interpretive journalism shapes media coverage of climate change. Global Environmental Change, 42, 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.11.004
CharlesM. (2013). News, documentary and advocacy journalism. In Fowler-WattK.AllanS. (Eds.), Journalism: New challenges (pp. 384–392). CJCR: Centre for Journalism and Communication Research. https://core.ac.uk/download/19963986.pdf
12.
ChenS.RoburnS. (2025). When pandemic stories become personal stories: Community journalism and the coverage of health inequalities. Journalism Practice, 19(3), 542–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2197420
13.
ChristiansC. G.GlasserT. L.McQuailD.NordenstrengK.WhiteR. A. (2009). Normative theories of the media: Journalism in democratic societies. University of Illinois Press.
EsserF.UmbrichtA. (2014). The evolution of objective and interpretative journalism in the western press: Comparing six news systems since the 1960s. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(2), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769901452745
16.
FaircloughN. (1995). Media discourse. Edward Arnold.
HanitzschT.VosT. P. (2016). Journalism beyond democracy: A new look into journalistic roles in political and everyday life. Journalism, 19(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916673386
19.
KaramanE. D. (2023). YouTube’u bir yavaş gazetecilik mekânı olarak aracılayan gazeteciler: Fatih altaylı örneği. Euroasia Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 10(35), 24–30.
20.
KrippendorffK. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
PapacharissiZ. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press.
27.
PariserE. (2011). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin Press.
28.
PredmerskáA. (2016). Review and criticism in online journalism. European Journal of Science and Theology, 12(5), 217–226.
29.
ReinemannC.StanyerJ.ScherrS.LegnanteG. (2012). Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427803
30.
SalgadoS.StrömbäckJ. (2012). Interpretive journalism: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427797
31.
SantanaA. D.HoppT. (2022). Blink and you miss it: Measuring news readers’ attention to interpretative journalism cues.Journalism Practice, 16(6), 1192–1208. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1827968
32.
SchreiberM. (2025). More than just talking parrots. Journalists Perspective on the Journalistic Voice in Reporting Political Utterances. Journalism Practice, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2025.2466071
33.
SomerM. (2016). Understanding Turkey’s democratic breakdown: Old vs. new and indigenous vs. global Authoritarianism. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 16(4), 481–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/14683857.2016.1246548
34.
ThornborrowJ.EkströmM.PatronaM. (2021). Discursive constructions of populism in opinion-based journalism: A comparative European study. Discourse, Context & Media, 44, Article 100542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2021.100542
35.
TshabanguT. (2021). Citizen journalists as interpretive discourse communities: A study of AMH voices in Zimbabwe (2014–2018). African Journalism Studies, 42(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2020.1855457
36.
Villagrán SánchezÁLópez PanF. (2025). Beyond journalism about journalism?: Assessing the impact of metajournalistic discourse on journalism studies. Journalism Studies, 26(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2024.2414349
YesilB. (2018). Authoritarian turn or continuity? Governance of media through capture and discipline in the AKP era. South European Society and Politics, 23(2), 239–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2018.1487137
39.
YesilB.SözeriE. K.KhazraeeE. (2017). Turkey’s internet policy after the coup attempt: The emergence of a distributed network of online suppression and surveillance. Internet Policy Observatory, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania. https://globalnetpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/TurkeyInternetPolicyReport.pdf.
40.
ZelizerB. (2017). What journalism could be. Polity Press.
41.
ZirugoD. (2025). Pernicious polarization, journalistic professionalization, and interpretive community structures beyond liberal democracies: A case of Zimbabwe. African Journalism Studies, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2024.2442440
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
