Eren Tutel Former referee Ahmet Çakar, who was detained in the first days of December as part of an investigation into betting and match-fixing allegations, released on health grounds and then kept under judicial control after giving a statement to the prosecutor, has not been taken off television screens while the process continues. Despite all these developments, Çakar continues to appear as a pundit on A Spor’s YouTube broadcasts and on the programme Beyaz Futbol on Beyaz TV. This picture has brought the political and editorial reflexes of the broadcasters to the fore rather than the substance of the investigation. Although there is not yet a final court ruling about Ahmet Çakar, criticism on social media focuses less on Çakar’s personal situation and more on the fact that a figure at the centre of the investigation is being put on screen and given the opportunity to steer public opinion. Especially in a case directly linked to structural problems in sport such as betting and match-fixing, broadcasters would be expected to act more cautiously, yet it stands out that A Spor and Beyaz TV have not put any editorial distance in place. A Spor and Beyaz TV are among the channels that do pro-government broadcasting close to the AKP government. A PRO-GOVERNMENT MEDIA REFLEX? Past examples show that these channels follow a protective, normalising and agenda-distracting editorial line in crises involving the government and its circle. Çakar continuing on air should be assessed within this framework. The issue is not only that a pundit remains on screen but that the seriousness of the investigation is not being conveyed to viewers and is even being made invisible. While many broadcasters, in similar investigations, temporarily remove names facing allegations from their screens, here the opposite picture has emerged. Keeping Çakar on screen normalises the investigation and makes it seem unimportant. This is a strong example not only of the sports media’s internal oversight but also of how the concept of pro-government media works in practice. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS The picture that has emerged makes some questions unavoidable: - Why do channels close to the government and described as pro-government not put editorial distance in place during such an investigation? - What message does continuing the broadcasts give to viewers? - Can sports media really take an impartial stance on structural problems like betting and match-fixing? These questions have not yet been answered, but one thing is certain: the debate is growing not around one person but around the limits of sports broadcasting in Turkey. Note: This article is translated from the original article titled Soruşturma sürerken yandaşların ekranında , published in BirGün newspaper on December 18, 2025.