This week, let's turn to an ongoing debate in the Turkish media. On Oct. 24, the front page of the Hürriyet daily featured a headline translated as, "Here is Bylock, David Keynes." This headline might not mean much to our foreign readers, especially if they have not followed the investigations in the wake of the failed coup attempt on July 15. First, let's look at the culprits. There are very strong indications and evidence that those responsible for the failed coup include members of the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ). Among the evidence obtained in the case is a close-circuit communication program known as Bylock used by FETÖ members to send secret messages, engage in private communications and make private directives. The National Intelligence Organization (MİT) managed to decipher this program, uncovering evidence of communication between FETÖ members who used the program in what has become a key piece of evidence in the investigation and prosecution of those involved in the coup.Thus, the Hürriyet headline and news article regarding the Bylock program sat pretty close to the center of things. One Hürriyet reporter, İsmail Saymaz, wrote about his interview with David Keynes, the holder of the Bylock patent in the U.S. Saymaz said that he related the information given to him in the news article. Normally, this would be seen as a great success for journalism, as everyone was so honed in on the issue, and Saymaz managed to approach it from a different perspective.However, it wasn't seen as such since Saymaz not only refrained from directing the necessary questions at the person he interviewed, but also turned a blind eye to this person's misleading information. Thus, the journalist became a tool of manipulation.According to information given by Keynes that Saymaz included in the article:- Bylock is a common messaging application open to everyone and can be easily downloaded by anyone to his or her computer.Bylock was not used after January. Thus, messages sent through Bylock were not relevant to the July 15 failed coup attempt.Not everyone who uses Bylock is a member of FETÖ. At least 10 percent of the users are not members of FETÖ.Bylock messages cannot be considered as evidence in coup trials.However, nearly all this information was known to be false even before this interview took place. After all:Bylock can only be downloaded if you provide a reference. If you are not a member of FETÖ, you are not included in the communication web. You need special passwords to register as a user.Bylock serves as a primary source when dismantling and uncovering the FETÖ structure. Therefore, there are more than enough messages that can serve as evidence in coup cases that have been opened since July 15.Bylock messages were deciphered in May. Correspondence between FETÖ members continued after the initial discovery. After all, videos of soldiers in General Staff Headquarters that used Bylock to communicate during the night of the coup tell a tale of their own.Bylock was used even after the coup attempt. The related content can be found in news articles by the Sabah and Star dailies. For example, culprits were discussing strategies after their attempt to overthrow the government and how these failed. They were instructed to ignore the repentance law and deny any accusations made against them while receiving permission to curse Gülen's name if they ended up being interrogated by the police.Another very significant fact in this matter is about Keynes himself. The person introduced as Keynes in the Hürriyet daily is actually known for having been raised in organizations with close ties to FETÖ, having studied in FETÖ-linked schools and lived with members of FETÖ. We know that he was a Turkish citizen who went to the U.S. from Turkey, got citizenship there and changed his name to David Keynes. Even though Hürriyet was aware of these facts, it decided to ignore them and print the article without including relevant background information. They allowed themselves to be misled to publish a manipulative news article that in turn misled the readers.This is not only a grave mistake that every journalist should avoid to maintain his or her credibility, but it is also a situation that contradicts journalistic integrity since they apparently allowed this manipulation willingly. Even if they only relayed what they were told by Keynes, they published the information without the simplest of fact checks or an appropriate investigation. That is why this article is not a journalistic success but a disgrace.