One of our fears is that an uncontrolled media will lead us to ethnic and religious conflict. Malaysia will become synonymous with violence. We fear a repeat of May 13, we fear a repeat of the repression of Operasi Lallang. And these are worth avoiding. But history teaches important lessons about the role of media freedom in situations leading up to ethnic violence.

A word of caution. Media freedom does not necessarily prevent ethnic violence. We saw that in Australia. Generally, however, the lessons of the past seem to indicate that media freedom helps prevent violence. That extremes of violence, in particular, take place where the media is controlled, where there is no diversity and where debate and discussion are actively discouraged.

The most famous recent example is Rwanda, where the media played a crucial role in mobilising the masses. Radio de Milles Collines is infamous.

Broadcaster Valerie Bemeriki told her audience not to waste bullets on the "cockroaches", but to kill them with machetes instead. Her speeches were key in directing the genocide. She claims she was merely a foot-soldier, obeying the orders of her editors and is still awaiting trial.

There is no doubt in any sane mind that there should be no room on the airwaves for voices such as Bemeriki's. A sane government would work assiduously to ensure that she was not given her own show, that if she appeared on air it was in an atmosphere fraught with warning. But her voice was broadcast on a station owned by the Rwandan President's family. This was not a free, independent station. It was a political tool. The president was opposed to ending the country's civil war, opposed to sharing power with Tutsis. The radio station and its hate speech served his ends admirably.

Researchers looking into the role of the media in Rwanda have identified encouraging independent media as one of the major strategies that could have helped prevent the genocide.

According to Mark Frohardt, African regional director for Internews, "Rwandans had never been exposed to alternatives to state-owned or controlled media, they had little understanding of the bias, which is inherent in all media outlets".

It led to largely unquestioning obedience to the airwaves. Initiatives aimed at preventing the rebirth of Radio de Milles Collines are improving the professionalism of journalists and encouraging diversity of ownership and opinion.

None of the research into Rwanda and the media indicates that censorship and monolithic state control help to prevent violence.

Censorship is only advocated after the situation has descended into killings and "small-scale" violence. This is when the monolithic voices are broadcasting hatred and dehumanising targeted ethnicities.

It is a story repeated in the former Yugoslavia, in Cambodia during the 1970s, in Germany in the 1930s.

This does not mean that a free media alone can prevent genocide. And a free media is even worse at preventing outbreaks of violence. Take the riots in Cronulla, Australia. While nobody died, whether the media prolonged the violence has been extensively analysed. But it is analysis that is taking part in the public realm, and it is part of a soul-searching to see how and where Australia's institutions may need refining to protect all its citizens.

Investigative television show Four Corners interviewed youths from both sides of the conflict. The media themselves made decisions to downplay the ethnicity of those involved, trying not to inflame the situation.

Free speech helps communities come to terms with their diversity and difference. Anger bubbles to the surface, where it can be seen and dealt with, rather than remaining hidden behind layers of polite untruths. The lancing of the boil may hurt, it may involve casualties.

History shows that a free media plays a more consistent and important role in preventing violence than in causing it.

Sonia is the executive director of the Centre for Independent Journalism, working on communication rights, holds a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics and spends her time equally between writing, teaching and ranting.