Oh boy, folks, we have to talk about this @NPR piece, which should be held up in journalism classes as an example of how NOT to report on a story https://www.npr.org/2020/06/30/885659583/turkeys-claims-for-drilling-rights-in-mediterranean-sea-lead-to-threats-from-gre

I don't know if it's @pkenyonnpr or the editors at NPR, but someone dropped the ball and created a "news" report that reads more like Turkish disinformation than an accurate reporting of the situation between Greece, Cyprus, and Turkey.

The report purports to explain Turkey's aggression in the region, specifically with respect to Turkey's insistence on drilling in Cyprus's exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Now, let's be clear. That EEZ isn't a random border Cyprus decided to draw around its country.

It's a boundary determined by international law (the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea) and is recognized as such by the UN, the EU, and the US -- all of which have called out Turkey for its plans to essentially invade Cyprus's EEZ and exploit Cypriot natural resources.

Which brings us back to the article. Turkey, in its continued violation of international law, drew up a "deal" with Libya’s Government of National Accord - a controversial government body that isn't recognized by Libya's House of Reps - falsely laying claim to Cyprus's EEZ

The EU has pointed out that the agreement "infringes upon the sovereign rights of third States, does not comply with the Law of the Sea and cannot produce any legal consequences for third states." https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2019-004107-ASW_EN.html

But if you were to read the NPR piece, you wouldn't learn any of that. Instead, you get this:

"Both dubious"??? This bothsiderism by @Tmegrisi really does a disservice to the audience, and shame on NPR for not following up with the real facts.

Did NPR inform its audience about the EU stance on the issue? The UN's stance? How about the State Department's stance? Was there any attempt made to get a comment from these sources? Or heck, even Google their past statements? (spoiler alert: they all support Cyprus)

On the one hand, you have the EU, the UN, and the US all acknowledging that Cyprus's position is soundly based on international law, and on the other hand, you have Turkey drawing lines on a map of the Eastern Med like a three year old..."both dubious!"

I don't know what's more mind-boggling: that NPR decided to only interview an analyst who was a consultant on "democratisation assistance to Libya’s post-revolutionary authorities" in evaluating the validity of a maritime deal signed by those post-revolutionary authorities...

or that NPR failed to do the most basic, Journalism 101 research on what the real facts are, as opposed to the Turkish spin on the issue. The real kicker? The final takeaway NPR and Megrisi want to give to the audience...

Oh, if only there was such an international body! A union of sorts, perhaps of European nations? Or a unity of nations across the world?

So in short, shame on NPR for failing to do basic journalism or even basic googling and allowing its audience to be misled into thinking Cyprus's defense of its EEZ is "spurious" when the UN, the EU, and the US have repeatedly confirmed it is anything but.