When Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan lashed out against a particular media group in recent months, issues such as media ethics, reporting and conflict of interest once again took the spotlight.

This might be viewed as a belated column on the issue, but I have lately become the victim of bad reporting and think this needs to be brought up again.

First of all, the Turkish media has become so polarized that we no longer read news but news that provides material to further either a political or an economic agenda. There is no such thing as objective reporting in this country. Instead, reporting here is about projecting a statement or comment in such a way that serves the interest of the media boss and his or her economic or political interests.

The media is relentless and shameless in adding commentary and opinion to a statement and reporting in such a way that it is understood that the source agrees with the commentary or, worse, has said it in those terms. I personally experienced two such incidents on the chief negotiator issue and have become disgusted with the way these things take place and are quickly consumed. What is happening in the media here?

The media is committing suicide by poisoning public debate, polarizing society and solidifying the separateness and division of this nation. Such a fierce and relentless war will have no winner but will only damage the standing of the political class, as well as the media as an institution in our society. The media and the political class were already quite suspicious in the public eye. There is little doubt in my mind that all parties involved will be bruised by this.

The primary structural problems are obvious. First of all, we need legislation that forbids media groups to own other businesses. There is a clear conflict of interest issue here. If one wants to be in the media, it should be their sole occupation. You simply cannot own a media group and a major gas station network. Media owners must not be able to use their media power to further their own business interests in other sectors.

Secondly, the media needs a ruling body, a sort of guild institution (a media council) that would be responsible for following up on accepted media norms and bringing offenders into line. I am not familiar enough with the media sector to propose where such a media council would be organized, but this in no way diminishes the urgent need for it. Such a media council must set norms, monitor current media practices and have both the authority and legitimacy to punish offenders.

Also, there is need for more specialization in the media. Most journalists have little expertise in the areas they cover, do not care or do not have the time to specialize in their fields, and thus produce poor reporting. But the main challenge appears to be to ingrain the basic rules and standards into journalists.

Years ago, I worked as a foreign policy correspondent for a national newspaper. It was a challenging job, and I must say I witnessed the shortcomings of the printed and electronic media from the inside. Most importantly, the media itself should acknowledge that there is a problem. If you look at Turkish approval ratings, you will see that the media ranks last. There is no doubt that media barons would resist legislation that separates media from other economic activity, but there are contemporary examples in other countries. Turkey must examine the many different models and adapt them to the Turkish case.