Funding of Knowledge and Intellectual Independence

Today we are not going to discuss contemporary issues, we are going to talk about the financing of information. This is a topic that I have actually wanted to write about for a long time. As we move quickly through current events, there are some realities that we need, that we need to discuss, but we don’t have time for them. For this reason, I would like to include some academic-themed articles/discussions among our articles. I hope to discuss topics that transcend the ages, that we can call timeless, under this title.

Let’s talk about financing information… First of all, let us explain the concept of financing knowledge. What does it mean to finance a tomato or a car? This is easy to understand, because tomatoes are a necessity, pepper is a necessity, bread is a tangible necessity. Agricultural products are a tangible, visible need. You grow them, you put them on the market, and when you supply these products, there is a demand. This creates a price for the commodity. What is the price of bread, say 5$, 10$… It has a cost. You sell it for 3 $, you sell it for 5 $, the 2 $ in between becomes your profit and your capital for the next year. The same is true for industrial products. There too, there is a concrete, visible need. There is supply, there is demand. A price is formed between supply and demand, and the result is the financing of industrial products. This is how your sector becomes industrialized, a wheel is formed.

So is this pricing-demand relationship and the formation of the price, the formation of the value of the good valid for every product? No, it is not. There are some products that need to be financed, funded by income earned elsewhere. This is the case with social activities, helping the poor, etc. In my opinion, the production of knowledge and ideas is the most valuable product on earth. Knowledge and ideas are much more important and much more difficult to obtain than agricultural or industrial products. There is a highly sophisticated production process in knowledge production. Compared to industry, agriculture and the service sector, knowledge production is much more complex and sophisticated.

On the other hand, despite the fact that knowledge is so valuable, people do not easily realize that they need knowledge or that knowledge is valuable. It is not always so easy for the masses to understand the value of knowledge. For this reason, the supply-demand mechanism and classical price formation methods do not work very well in financing knowledge. In other words, when you offer the world’s most valuable knowledge to society, especially the common people, that is, people on the street, ordinary people who are not experts in that subject, have difficulty in understanding the value of that product, it is not possible for them to pay a price for it, to pay money for it. Or, since those who understand the value of that product, idea/information and pay a price for it do not reach a sufficient number, the production of that information is not realized at the desired level.

When we look at the early ages, we see that scientists and artists were mostly patronized by rich and powerful people. Scientists and artists were patronized in a palace, in the palace of a king or a ruler, and they continued their scientific and artistic work there. There was no other institution that could do this job, that could protect science and art. People could not do this with their own power. I don’t know, it is very difficult to establish an observatory on your own. There were some rich people from the family; of course there were some people who had inherited money from their families and were interested in science and art. There were people who spent all their property, land, houses and money for this cause, but these are very exceptional.

Secondly, it was not as easy as one might think to do science and art with personal wealth, because these things were not only a matter of money, but in those years there was also a need for other kinds of patronage. As civilization developed and wealth spread, not only the heads of state of a country, but also local lords or elites of the feudal order began to patronize artists and scientists/thinkers. In the mansion, mansion, mansion, mansion of the prominent person of the city, the prominent person of the principality, whatever it is, we see that artists and scientists and intellectuals are patronized. This protection was both material protection and protection from political and social pressures. But this had some drawbacks. If you ask what the drawbacks were, first of all, it took away or limited your freedom. Whichever mansion you took refuge in, you were not supposed to contradict the ideas of those in that mansion, you were not supposed to criticize them, on the contrary, you were supposed to praise them. When we look at such patronized scientists, intellectuals, artists, we first see that eulogies, poems, books full of praise were written for the person or persons who patronized them. the work done was attributed to the patron, gratitude to the patron was shown in some way. Therefore, in this system, it would not have been possible to work on an idea that opposed your patron or an administration that your patron was afraid of. You could work in an extremely limited area. You cannot clash with the Palace, the Mansion.

The other point is that it is very difficult to reach the public. You don’t need the public in this system because you are not selling your product to the public. The masses are not your customers. The value of the idea or information you produce is determined by the buyer, your patron. The price he gives you depends not on the quality of your production but on your ability to satisfy him.

The public may have no idea about your work. The value of your work will be realized maybe 100 years later, 500 years later, 600 years later. This system had such drawbacks. The price of knowledge and works of art were not determined by the masses. This situation continued until the 1400s, more precisely until the 1500s. The invention of the printing press in the 1450s changed the picture completely.

Gutenberg actually wanted to make money, he wanted to get rich. For the first time in Europe, in Germany, such a practical, easy-to-use printing machine was developed. Although the printing press had been invented by the Chinese for the first time, the printing press developed in Germany was easy to use and did full justice to the word printing press. The printing press is an extremely practical machine. It makes printing cheaper and makes it easier to print many different books quickly and in series.

We are talking about a very practical machine. Around 1450, this machine appeared. Maybe Gutenberg did not make much money from this machine. Maybe he even made a loss. But the machine he invented was so popular that by 1500, the printing press had become a widely used machine in Paris, London and various parts of Europe, in almost all of Western Europe, in all universities. By 1500, the printing press had become an integral part of daily life, cultural life and educational life.

The part of the story facing the eastern world is known, namely that the Ottoman Empire banned the printing press. And to whom did it ban it? It banned it to Muslims. So Jews, Armenians and Greeks had the right to use the printing press. But they were also told, “You can print books, but you cannot print religious, Islamic books, you cannot print the Holy Quran, you cannot print books about hadiths, but you can print things about yourself”. There are many reasons for this, but I don’t want to go into too much detail today. In a later article, we will examine this issue separately, the issue of the printing press in the Ottoman Empire, the issue of the printing press in the Islamic world.

If there had been no printing press, there probably would not have been a Protestant sect in those days. In other words, if there had been no printing press, perhaps Christianity would not have been divided in the way it is today. Maybe Protestantism or similar sects would have emerged, but without the printing press it would not have grown so fast, maybe its influence would not have reached so many places. Because thanks to the printing press, the works of Protestant leaders spread at a tremendous speed. In the early 15th century, we see that tens of thousands of such books were printed. Luther’s books, for example. Even today, if you were to write a book in Turkey, aside from exceptions, your book would usually be printed in a thousand copies or two thousand copies. Authors are happy when their books sell 2,000 copies, but both the author and the publishing house are very happy when they sell 5,000 copies. The massification of the book and the payment of a certain price for each book have played a big role in the liberation of thinkers and intellectuals. Look, what happened thanks to this? The author was able to put his book on the market, in other words, his idea turned into a material object, became tangible. Ideas turned into a commodity that was not handwritten, that was distributed by the thousands and tens of thousands and monetized. Of course there are negative aspects to this development. Everything has both positive and negative aspects, but the most important benefit here is the direct connection between the writer and the reader. The author was able to touch large masses with his ideas. In addition, the ideas that gained a tangible existence led to a supply-demand relationship. Both literacy became mass and widespread and ideas spread to the masses.

In my opinion, this is one of the important reasons why the printing press did not become widespread in the Near East, in the Islamic geography, especially in the Ottoman Empire, or why the ban on the printing press was not lifted for centuries, that is, the possibility of uncontrolled dissemination of ideas, the possibility of them spreading around. The Ottoman sultans were extremely intelligent people. My opinion is that they saw this, this danger. It is not possible that they did not see it. Even if they did not see these risks at first, it is unthinkable that they did not see them later. If they didn’t see it in the 15th century, they would see it in the 16th century, and if they didn’t see it in the 16th century, they would see it in the 17th century. Moreover, it will not be until the 17th century before they realize the consequences of such an invention with such obvious effects. Because when we talk about the sultan/khalifa, we are not only talking about him, but also about a state under him. It is not possible for the printing press to remain banned for hundreds of years. With the emergence and spread of the printing press, the financing of knowledge became easier and its nature changed. These effects of the printing press are not talked about much in our country. The printing press may be talked about, but its impact on the financing of knowledge is not. Likewise, the impact of the printing press on the emergence of the press is not talked about much. The press emerged with the birth of the printing press.

What is the press? Newspapers, magazines… What are newspapers and magazines? You print a thousand of them, daily articles containing some ideas, news, you spread them around on the same day. You print daily news and distribute it on the same day. You call this a newspaper. Or you print and distribute weekly news, monthly news in magazine format. Such a fast and large print run would only have been possible with the printing press. In other words, there is no press by writing by hand, printing by hand…

With the emergence of the printing press, or rather with the effective use of the printing press, the press also began. In fact, some of the book-format publications that came out in this period were actually aiming for a newspaper-like function. There are things like one-page, two-page flyers, these are all things done with the logic of a newspaper. They write one page, print it and distribute it. In other words, they were printed in the way we call flyers today, but if you look at it, it is not different from newspapers, magazines and press in terms of function.

By the 17th century, serious newspapers started to emerge. When you look at the 18th century, there are newspapers in some Western countries, institutionalized newspapers have started to emerge. 18th century British newspapers can make very harsh criticisms. There were attempts at censorship, of course, but a really serious press emerged. The emergence of the press is thanks to what? It is thanks to the printing press, and thanks to the mass support and capital of newspaper owners, they are able to challenge and oppose the king and the government. What enables them to do this? They can do this thanks to the payment of money to their newspapers. In other words, the reader keeps the newspaper alive, finances it. With the financing of the readers, that newspaper survives.

How much? Here is 10 cents… A thousand people pay 10 cents. If the circulation is higher, 20 thousand people give 10 cents each. In this way, those who publish the newspaper find the motivation to continue publishing it, and in this way they can maintain their independence… Advertisements and advertisements appear later on, adding to the strength of newspapers.

When we look at today’s world, this is pretty much how it continues. Newspapers that can be financed by their readers and journalism can remain relatively strong, qualified and independent. For example, if you want to buy a newspaper in the UK, if you go to a newsstand and you want to buy Financial Time, you pay 4.80 pounds. I’m not talking about a monthly newspaper, I’m not talking about a monthly subscription, I’m talking about the price of a weekend newspaper. If you want to buy the Sunday Times you have to pay 3.5 pounds. If you want to buy The Guardian, that’s £2.80. If you want to buy the New York Times, the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal, you will pay a similar price. When you compare these figures with less developed countries like Turkey, they are very expensive.

This means that it is difficult to get a newspaper in the United Kingdom and the United States, and it is expensive compared to daily necessities, like groceries. They even pay 20 eggs for a newspaper in the UK. In Turkey, newspapers are sold for the price of 1 egg, in the UK you can buy a copy of a daily newspaper for a price close to the price of half a kilo of minced meat. For example, if you compare it to bread, the newspaper is much more expensive than bread…

Newspapers are more expensive than bread, eggs, milk… This means that readers in these countries value newspapers more than bread, eggs, etc… Instead of 1 kilo of sugar, instead of half a kilo of minced meat, he buys his newspaper. Newspapers are precious in these countries. So it is not a good thing that newspapers are cheap. It is also not a good thing that the price of books is cheap. It seems like a good thing that the prices of cultural products are cheap, but it is not. You have to pay the price so that a quality product is produced, so that the cultural producer can remain free and independent in the face of those in power. If the consumer doesn’t pay the price, someone will try to publish a newspaper with the money he earns elsewhere, but then his priority will not be the newspaper, it will be the business he earns money from. The newspaper starts to lose its characteristic of being a newspaper. It loses its freedom. Since it doesn’t make money from journalism, it also loses its quality…

If the book doesn’t make money, someone will set up a publishing house and publish books with the money he earns elsewhere, but then his priority is not to publish newspapers or sell books, it can’t be. Publishing turns into a tool that hides or feeds other businesses, not a purpose. It starts to manipulate the reader. Where money is made is the priority. This is why non-press bosses do not and cannot prioritize newspapers. If you look at the example of US newspapers, you can see that those who make money from that business are able to remain strong, high quality and independent.

By the way, let me also say that quality is very important. It is as important as independence. What good is an independent newspaper if it is not good. It has to be all at once. For example, it takes a long time to read The New York Times, it takes a long time to finish reading it. Especially on weekends, you can finish the day with one NYT. But when we look at the newspapers of underdeveloped countries, let me tell you frankly, if you put 5 or even 10 of them in a row, it is not one New York Times.

It does not take that much time to read. The reason for this is the limited budget and the lack of quality journalism production… Readers or journalism do not finance newspapers… So the financing of information is very important. Information needs to be financed by independent sources. Journalism and media institutions need to be able to run on their own. Today, the New York Times is also facing serious problems. Newspapers such as the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post are struggling to survive. Of course, the Internet has some effects on this. They are trying to keep up with the Internet age, but of course it is difficult…

They are developing an online subscription system, and even if the prices are not that high, they are still trying to make money from journalism. They know that otherwise they will lose their freedom, quality and power. How many people can pay 20 euros for a book? How many people can pay 50 dollars? Do you know what happens when the reader doesn’t pay that money, when the books are copied, when the author is not paid for his labor? Then the author cannot be independent. He cannot earn money from what he writes, that is, from his labor. When he cannot earn money, he cannot invest in his future writings, he cannot maintain that quality. In other words, he writes a work, maybe it is of very high quality, but he cannot maintain the same quality in the second one, because what he earns from the first one is not enough to finance or develop the second one…

If you earn a regular income from a job, if you make money, it starts to become a sector and your subsequent work starts to become more qualified. If you look at underdeveloped countries with underdeveloped democracies, this is one of their biggest handicaps. The financing of knowledge, the financing of culture, the financing of books and newspapers is not in order. Of course, for this, for this financing, the support of the readers or the audience alone may not be enough. In addition, some foundations need to be established. There are many of these foundations in the West. There must be institutions and associations that lend money for free, that provide financial aid for free, that demand the production of certain values and cultural products for free, and that support this. These are formed by the lovers of that cultural activity.

For example, it is one thing for a company that produces and sells sugar, tomatoes, tomato paste and tomato paste to enter and swallow a newspaper. There, priorities change, but it is not the same for someone who loves journalism to establish a foundation or an association with the money he earns from sugar production. It is another thing for a businessman with a passion for culture to go and establish a foundation, an association, and take other people who are very enthusiastic about this issue with him and help and contribute to the production of culture and knowledge.

In other words, the financing of knowledge is a very vital issue, and it is perhaps one of the most important conditions for knowledge production to be free, independent, strong and to produce quality products. Coming back to the point we made at the beginning; “if a country, a group or a person, no matter who they are, if they do not raise a generation, if they do not raise a human being, if they do not produce an idea, they are not doing anything permanent”. Raising a generation, producing an idea. These are vital issues. The most advanced, most developed product a country can produce is ideas.

First of all, we need to understand how important this idea production is, and immediately afterwards, supporting and financing the idea production and the writers and journalists who contribute to this idea production should be among the priority issues. When we look at the past, we can see how independent and qualified publications and products have emerged since the advent of the printing press, and there are very serious lessons to be learned from these.

It may not be a topic that is talked about much in newspapers, on television and on the internet, but it is important. We have talked about this important issue, even if just a little bit. Of course it is not enough. I would like to get into these issues as time goes on.

I hope you enjoyed it. We will touch upon other aspects of the subject in other articles. Thank you for reading.