Because your first statement is really at the root of my complaints here. I don't expect a Third World country to behave like anything else, but I think trying to integrate one into 21st Century Western society is not only monumentally stupid, but dangerous.

Still, if a government operated network broadcasts a sensationalist drama that makes demonstrably false claims about whole nations said government is complicit in those claims, and I don't think refusing to be so constitutes censorship. If Israel and Palestine got mad at Turkey for what a thoroughly private broadcaster aired within the country I would wholly support the Turkish government telling them to get stuffed (as the Brits so eloquently put it ) When it goes out under even nominally government auspices though, and when it's both inflammatory and false, it has "international incident" written all over it, and I think that justifies the government telling its own employees not to air something that makes false and derogatory claims about entire nations. What's more, I think the Turkish governments position on the Armenian Genocide amply demonstrates they're not above censorship; this isn't a principled stand in favor of free speech, it's a decision by default that the program contained nothing objectionable in the first place. Which, by no coincidence, brings us full circle to the first argument above.