Why Online Polarization Matters at the Community Level
Digital platforms allow fast and inclusive communication, but they also amplify emotional reactions and group divisions. Opinion polarization often leads to extreme views, personal attacks, and the breakdown of dialogue. While most global research focuses on platform algorithms or misinformation, less attention is paid to how users themselves manage disagreement. In Indonesian cities such as Surabaya, neighborhood WhatsApp groups play a vital role in daily governance. Residents use them to coordinate activities, share information, and debate social issues. These groups are close-knit and informal, which can strengthen solidarity but also make conflicts more personal when opinions clash. Understanding how these communities manage disagreement is increasingly relevant for policymakers, community leaders, and digital communication practitioners seeking alternatives to top-down content moderation.
How the Research Was Conducted
The research used a qualitative case study approach combined with digital netnography, a method for observing online communities in their natural settings.
The authors focused on a WhatsApp group of RT/RW residents in Surabaya. Data were collected through:
· Direct observation of group discussions
· In-depth interviews with 10 key informants, including group administrators, RT/RW officials, and active members
· Review of archived messages and community documents
The researchers analyzed the data thematically to identify recurring communication patterns and strategies used to manage disagreement.
Key Findings: How Communities Reduce Polarization
The study identified several practical strategies that helped prevent conflict escalation and maintain dialogue.
1. Informal moderation works
Instead of strict rules or bans, group administrators and community leaders intervened gently when discussions became tense. They used reminders, clarification, and mediation rather than punishment. Moderation was relational, not authoritarian. Because moderators were trusted community members, their interventions were widely accepted.
2. Calming message framing lowers emotional intensity
Community actors often reframed heated exchanges using neutral and empathetic language. Messages emphasized shared identity, common interests, and collective problem-solving rather than personal disagreement. This approach helped participants pause, reflect, and respond more thoughtfully.
3. Shared communication norms guide behavior
The group maintained clear expectations around respectful language and mutual respect. Some norms were written, others reinforced through repeated practice. When norms were violated, members often reminded each other collectively, reducing the need for formal enforcement.
4. Roles and legitimacy matter
Admins and RT/RW officials had symbolic authority, while active members acted as stabilizers during debates. This division of roles created a distributed system of communication control rather than reliance on a single moderator. Together, these elements formed a resilient, trust-based system for managing disagreement.
What This Means for Society and Policy
The findings show that online polarization is not inevitable. Digital communities are not passive victims of technology; they are active social actors capable of governing their own communication. For local governments, the study offers insight into strengthening neighborhood communication without heavy regulation. Supporting community leaders and digital literacy may be more effective than imposing rigid rules. For platform designers and policymakers, the research suggests that community-based moderation complements algorithmic solutions. Trust, legitimacy, and social norms play a crucial role that technology alone cannot replace. For educators and civil society organizations, the findings highlight practical communication skills—empathy, framing, and norm reinforcement—that can be taught and replicated in other digital spaces.
Insight from the Researchers
According to Yuzril Fadhil Muhammad of Universitas Dr. Soetomo, the Surabaya case demonstrates the power of everyday communication practices.
The study shows that differences of opinion are not the core problem. Conflict emerges when communication breaks down. By maintaining respectful dialogue and shared norms, communities can preserve social cohesion even when disagreements persist. The research positions digital communities as capable of self-regulation through trust-based interaction.
Author Profile
Yuzril Fadhil Muhammad, S.I.Kom., M.I.Kom. Lecturer and researcher in digital communication and community media Universitas Dr. Soetomo, Surabaya, Indonesia Farida, S.Sos., M.Si.
Researcher in social communication and community studies Universitas Dr. Soetomo, Surabaya, Indonesia Their expertise focuses on digital communities, online communication governance, and social cohesion in the digital era.
Source
Article Title: Communication Strategies of Digital Communities in Managing Opinion Polarization within Online Discussion Spaces
Journal: Jurnal Sosial, Politik, dan Budaya (SOSPOLBUD)
Publication Year: 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55927/sospolbud.v5i1.15938
0 Komentar