<![CDATA[This article examines how Indonesian Facebook users responded to media posts about the Iran–Israel conflict and how these responses contributed to the emergence of discursive chaos in digital public space. Existing studies on digital political communication have often examined misinformation, polarization, and platform dynamics separately. Less attention has been given to how media framing, emotional antagonism, and distrust toward information interact simultaneously in comment sections, especially in non-Western contexts. To address this gap, this study employed a qualitative digital discourse approach based on publicly accessible Facebook posts and user comments circulated in Indonesian online spaces. The analysis combined thematic reading and discourse-oriented interpretation to examine how users received, contested, redirected, and emotionally amplified media narratives. The findings show that Facebook comment sections did not function merely as spaces for responding to news, but as arenas of discursive struggle. Users reinterpreted conflict updates through ridicule, moralization, symbolic alignment, and contests of credibility. In several cases, the Iran–Israel conflict was also localized into broader political and ideological grievances, including distrust of mainstream media, anti-Western sentiment, and criticism of international power relations. These patterns indicate that discursive chaos emerged not only from false information, but also from the interaction among media framing, affective polarization, epistemic distrust, and antagonistic participation within the platform environment. This study contributes to digital political communication scholarship by showing that Indonesian responses to international conflict are shaped not only by issue salience, but also by emotionally charged reinterpretation and the weakening of shared epistemic ground]]>
