Jakarta — The way media report political protests can significantly shape how the public understands them. This is the key finding of a recent study by Annisa Khoiruni Hidaya and Nur Azizah Fitrianti from Universitas Pamulang, published in 2026 in the International Journal of Scientific Multidisciplinary Research (IJSMR). The study examines how Kompas.com and Detik.com framed the 17+8 Protest Movement and how those frames influenced public perceptions in digital spaces.
The research highlights the growing power of digital media in shaping political understanding. In today’s internet-driven society, people do not simply consume information; they actively interpret, debate, and share it. Online media have become major actors in constructing political reality.
The 17+8 Protest Movement emerged in Indonesia in August 2025 as a civil protest against political, economic, and social concerns. Its name refers to seventeen short-term demands and eight long-term demands directed at the government. These demands include democratic reform, anti-corruption measures, labor rights, economic justice, and environmental concerns. The movement gained national attention through strong digital mobilization, especially among younger generations.
Using a qualitative approach, the researchers analyzed news coverage from Kompas.com and Detik.com published between August and September 2025. They applied Robert Entman’s framing model, focusing on problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and treatment recommendations. Audience responses in digital spaces were also observed.
The study found major differences in how the two outlets framed the same event. Kompas.com mainly presented the protest as a democratic expression of civic participation, emphasizing public accountability and social justice.
Its coverage portrayed the movement as a legitimate response to governance failures, inequality, and public dissatisfaction. Solutions highlighted by Kompas.com focused on dialogue, policy reform, and stronger democratic engagement.
In contrast, Detik.com framed the movement more through the lens of public order, security, and social stability. Its reports often focused on crowd control, traffic disruptions, and law enforcement preparations.
This framing positioned the protest as a risk that needed management rather than a democratic opportunity. Government officials and law enforcement were more dominant as sources, strengthening narratives of caution and stability.
According to the authors, these framing differences show that media do not simply reflect reality. They actively construct political meaning by deciding what aspects to emphasize and how events should be interpreted.
The study also found that audience reactions in digital spaces largely reflected each outlet’s dominant frame. Readers of Kompas.com tended to support the protest as a democratic action, while Detik.com readers were more likely to express concerns about security and public disruption.
However, audiences were not passive. Many users challenged, negotiated, or reinterpreted the media narratives based on personal experiences or alternative information sources.
The findings underline the importance of media literacy in the digital age. Citizens need critical thinking skills to avoid relying on a single narrative, while media organizations are encouraged to provide more balanced and contextual reporting.
For policymakers and educators, this study offers insight into how digital political communication now depends not only on the content of messages but also on how those messages are framed.
0 Komentar