Fadi Bou Dayya has often stirred controversy with his provocative interventions in the media and on social platforms, much like many in the opposing Lebanese camps. This partisan activist, who aligns himself with the media world and adopts a harsh tone not devoid of threats, went too far this time by promoting the legitimacy of Iran launching missiles at the American University of Beirut. He implied that the university's students are no better than the Iranian students killed by American planes at a school in southern Iran at the beginning of the war. Even the resistance axis, which had considered Bou Dayya a resistant journalist and supported his discourse, could not tolerate his words this time, prompting his associates in the media and his close affiliates to disavow him and his statements.

This incident, which reflects a recurring daily pattern and is not exclusive to Bou Dayya, urgently highlights a serious problem that increasingly threatens civil peace: the rampant speech on traditional media and social media without accountability or oversight. Agitators from all sides—whether "sovereignists and resistance supporters," or those associated with either side or close to them—unleash on screens hatred, dangerous ideas, threats, and destructive sectarian and communal delirium, at a time when the country stands on the brink.

The issue raises a fundamental question: Who is a journalist? And, by extension, is everyone who appears on a screen—regardless of its size or format—a journalist? Who gave them the right to call themselves journalists, or allowed a fraudulent website to distribute professional titles to anyone?

If the state—with its Ministry of Information, judiciary, and aging National Media Council—is unable to regulate the media landscape, just as it fails to control anything else in the country, no one should expect this raging wave to subside. The storm may calm briefly, only for someone from here or there to emerge, inciting division and openly calling for civil war, while their host feigns surprise and amusement at what is being said—smiling smugly—when in fact they specifically invited them to make these statements and had incited them.

Revisiting the concepts, a journalist is someone who informs and educates the public through a recognized and reputable communication medium, explaining, analyzing, and connecting facts to reach logical conclusions. Journalism is a profession with its own principles, ethics, and regulations, and it is certainly not a field for those without proper training, nor for impersonators who have encroached upon it without academic, professional, or ethical preparation—exploiting the absence of regulatory laws and the weakness of official authority in the face of the forces of the status quo and the media’s dominance over the country’s public space.

The profession of journalism requires seeking out information, verifying it before publishing or broadcasting, maintaining objectivity, and—most importantly—committing to the national interest rather than factional agendas, especially in times of war and sedition. Yet the reality is that merchants, ambitious individuals, and fame-obsessed amateurs have intruded into this sensitive field, using their own money or that of others, creating new media practices that contradict true professional principles—so much so that these practices have nearly become dominant. The title of "journalist" is now often granted to anyone who appears on a television or phone screen, regardless of the content of their discourse, earning admiration from their sect or party and the insults of their opponents. As for those who call themselves analysts, writers, researchers, or strategists with pompous titles, their story is another altogether.

Publicly prosecuting some of these individuals could open the door to curbing this phenomenon, provided that political interests and their mediations do not interfere. Yet the ultimate solution remains distant as long as there are no clear legal frameworks to regulate the rampant chaos that has taken deep root.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.