•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This research investigates the influence of social media on political change and the role of digital activism, with a particular emphasis on the obstacles of disinformation and polarism. The employed approach is a qualitative research examining literature pertinent to network society, political participation, and collective action theories. The findings indicate that social media enhances and broadens political mobilization by reducing participation barriers, enabling individuals to engage in political activity more inclusively. Nonetheless, obstacles such as political polarization and the proliferation of disinformation pose substantial impediments to the efficacy of digital engagement. In Indonesia, the polarization problem is intensified by using social media in political campaigns and social movements, with echo chambers and filter bubbles amplifying ideological distinctions. Moreover, pervasive disinformation disseminated via platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter frequently distorts public sentiment and erodes political movements' legitimacy. In conclusion, although social media possesses significant potential to enhance political engagement and organize the populace, the obstacles presented by polarization and disinformation impede the enduring efficacy of political transformation instigated by digital activism. Consequently, enhanced digital literacy and more stringent laws are essential to tackle these challenges and ensure that social media is a potent instrument for fortifying democracy.

References

Aspinall, E., & Mietzner, M. (2019). Indonesia's democratic paradox: competitive elections amidst rising illiberalism. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 55(3), 295-317.

Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., & Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber? Psychological Science, 26(10), 1531-1542.

Belinda, F., Somantri, G. R., Runturambi, A. J. S., & Puspitasari, M. (n.d.). Manipulation of Information in the 2024 Election in Indonesia: Political Dynamics in the Post-Truth Era. Migration Letters, 21(3), 43-58.

Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). THE LOGIC OF CONNECTIVE ACTION. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661

Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2018). Challenging Truth and Trust: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation. Computational Propaganda Research Project, 3, 26pp. http://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/93/2018/07/ct2018.pdf

Bünte, M., & Thompson, M. R. (2023). Presidentialism and Democracy in East and Southeast Asia. Routledge.

Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the Internet age. John Wiley & Sons.

Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2011). 3Introduction. In J. Earl & K. Kimport (Eds.), Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age (p. 0). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262015103.003.0001

Frenkel, S., Mozur, P., & Conger, K. (2019). China Cracks Down on Hong Kong Protesters' Use of Telegram App. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com

Gladwell, M. (2010). Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/10/04/small-change-malcolm-gladwell

Habermas, J., Lennox, S., & Lennox, F. (1974). The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964). New German Critique, 3, 49-55. https://doi.org/10.2307/487737

Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2013). Democracy's Fourth Wave: Digital Media and the Arab Spring. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199936953.001.0001

Lee, S. K., Sun, J., Jang, S., & Connelly, S. (2022). Misinformation of COVID-19 vaccines and vaccine hesitancy. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 13681.

Lim, M. (2017). Freedom to hate: social media, algorithmic enclaves, and the rise of tribal nationalism in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 49(3), 411-427.

Loader, B. D., Vromen, A., & Xenos, M. A. (2014). The networked young citizen: social media, political participation and civic engagement. Information Communication and Society, 17(2), 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571

Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: the dark side of Internet freedom. New York, NY: PublicAffairs, [2011].

Olson Jr, M. (1971). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, with a new preface and appendix (Vol. 124). harvard university press.

Puspitasari, M. M. (2021). The issue of entrepreneurship as a political gimmick or sustainability? (A study on 2019 presidential election campaign). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 716(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/716/1/012099

Resende, G., Melo, P., Sousa, H., Messias, J., Vasconcelos, M., Almeida, J., & Benevenuto, F. (2019). (Mis)information dissemination in WhatsApp: Gathering, analyzing and countermeasures. The World Wide Web Conference, 818-828.

Singh, M. N. (2012). JURGEN HABERMAS'S NOTION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE: A PERSPECTIVE ON THE CONCEPTUAL TRANSFORMATIONS IN HIS THOUGHT. The Indian Journal of Political Science, 73(4), 633-642. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41858870

Sunstein, C. (2018). # Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton university press.

Syahputra, I., Fajar Riyanto, W., Dian Pratiwi, F., & Lusri Virga, R. (2024). Escaping social media: the end of netizen's political polarization between Islamists and nationalists in Indonesia? Media Asia, 51(1), 62-80.

Tufekci, Z. (2017). Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. In Twitter and Tear Gas: The Power and Fragility of Networked Protest. https://doi.org/10.5325/bustan.11.1.0077

Yunita, F. T. (2019). Indonesia's Digital Democracy: Memes and Hoax Campaigns in the 2019 Presidential Election. Proceedings of the International Conference on Fake News and Elections in Asia, 105-131.

Download

Share

COinS