The relationship between media and the governments has probably being questioned since their existence together. The reliance of media on the government, and the same for the government also require them to keep a close bond with each other (Girit, 2013). However, here are the most two striking questions: ˜'What is the border of this bond?'', and ˜'What if the government uses this bond for enforcement on media in order to control the masses?''. To answer these questions we need to know the dimensions of this relationship. In other words,'' What makes them keep together?'' (Girit, 2013). Furthermore, breaking of this bond may lead to political pressure on media corporations. Therefore, in order to maintain their continuity media bosses may choose a path such as producing special bulletins for governments, sided publication or broadcasting, lying about events, allowing lies to be continued, removing stories that do not fit their agenda, or even worse censorship (Dr. Hall, 2012). In the end, we face a new kind of media which is corrupted and biased. There are many examples of media corruption around the world, especially in the past two decades. For instance, in Kenya, the state-controlled Kenya Broadcasting Corporation was the dominant power outside major urban centers, and its coverage tended to favour the government (Freedom House, 2012). Private media corporations can also be affected because of government advertising, tax cuts, or higher interest rates just like in the case of Latin American and Caribbean countries which attempted to restrain the media (Transparency International, 2003). Another example is from the USA. In 2003, CNN's chief news producer, Eason Jordan, admitted that they had covered up stories of cruelties by Saddam Hussein regime in order to favour the current regime in Iraq so that they could keep their Baghdad bureau open (Dr. Hall, 2012). When we consider the corruption of media in Turkey, it has no so