Journalism is the first victim in a conflict

In times of chaos, to call for calm seems naive. “Imagine there's no countries.”

- Kong Rithdee

Sure, John, I know your utopianism was well-intended, but try telling that to the blood-hounding jingoists running rampant online in Cambodia and Thailand.

One country went through a civil war and a genocide; the other was never colonised, invaded, or occupied. And yet the hawks on both sides are ready to turn what began as a petty border soap opera into an unnecessary mini-war that has cost so many lives. So much for history teaching us anything about humanity.

To call for calm may seem naive, but it’s fair to expect that call from journalists. Calm, caution, reason, levelheaded judgement: none is easy because if it's easy then it's not journalism but propaganda. If it’s easy then maybe it's politics.

Whether this brittle ceasefire will hold, and whether the government will realise it has allowed the military to dominate public discourse of the conflict, the role of journalism in the Thai-Cambodian clash is a subject worthy of introspection.

If it's too much to learn from history, then today’s lesson must be a reflection of how challenging it has become for the voice of reason to rise above the cacophony of chauvinistic war cries — especially at a time when social media has colonised public consciousness to the point of suffocation.