VISUAL CONTENT OF THE OMNIBUS LAW DEBATE IN INDONESIA: A CULTURAL-HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

Maman Lesmana; Lee Yeonkyung

doi:10.53806/ijcss.v6i4.1173

Authors

Maman Lesmana 1Department of Area Studies, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Jawa Barat, Indonesia
Lee Yeonkyung 21144 Jungbudaero Yongin-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53806/ijcss.v6i4.1173

Keywords:

visual content, twitter, omnibus law, Indonesia, Social media

Abstract

This paper analyses forms of visual contents and their meanings from the perspective of a material cultural perspective to understand social media within the specifics of Indonesian contexts. Using intertextual theory, this study explores visual contents as artifacts and examines their meanings. The data collected through Twitter’s search functions (API) concerns the case of the Omnibus Law in Indonesia. The period of study ran from October to November 2020, when disputes between the pro-and anti- positions of controversy reached their peaks. The study concludes that specific historical, cultural, and social contexts exercise a significant influence on the preference of forms of visual contents; but when thinking about how messages are embedded in forms and conveyed to recipients, the choice of visual form is mainly dictated by ideological leanings, namely progressivism or conservatism.

References

[1] Alingasa APT and Ofreneo MAP (2020). “Fearless, poerful, Filipino”: identity positionining i the hashtag activism of #BabaeAko. Feminist Media Studies 21(4): 587-603.

[2] Bonilla Y and Rosa J. (2015) #Ferguson: digital protest, hashtag ethnography, and the racial politics of social media in the United States. American Ethnologist 42(1): 4- 17.

[3] Borish L and Phillips MG. (2012) Sport History as Modes of Expression: Material Culture and Cultural Spaces in Sport and History. Rethinking History 16(4): 465-477.

[4] Brennan G and Hamlin A. (2014) Comprehending Conservatism: Frameworks and Analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies 19(2): 1-13.

[5] Bui TH (2016) The Influence of Social Media in Vietnam’s Elite Politics. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs (35)2: 89-112.

[6] Chattharakul A (2019) Social Media: Hashtag #Futurista. Contemporary Southeast Asia 4(2): 170-175.

[7] Chilton P. (2004) Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.

[8] Corpuz JCG. (2021) COVID-19 and the rise of social activism in Southeast Asia: a public health concern. Journal of Public Health 43(2): 364-365.

[9] D'Angelo FJ. (2009) The Rhetoric of Intertextuality. Rhetoric Review 29(1): 31-47.

[10] De Cleen B. (2018) The conservative political logic: a discourse-theoretical perspective. Journal of Political Ideologies 23(1): 10-29.

[11] Duile T. (2020) Challenging Hegemony: Nurhadi-Aldo and the 2019 Election in Indonesia. 51(2): 1-27.

[12] Durcham Peters J. (2001) Witnessing. Media Culture & Society 23(6): 707-723.

[13] Edyvane D. (2020) Incivility as Dissent. Political Studies 68(1): 93-109.

[14] Eryanto H. (2013) Analisis Naratif: Dasar-dasar dan Penerapannya dalam Analisis. Jakarta: Kencana.

[15] Fahmi U. (2019) Cultural Public Sphere: Tracking the Yokyakarta City Policy Agenda through the # JogjaOraDidol hashtag on Twitter. Policy & Governance Review 3(1): 73-90.

[16] Frank, R. (2004) When the Going Gets Tough, the Tough Go Photoshopping: September 11 and the Newslore of Vengeance and Victimization. New Media & Society 6(5): 633–658.

[17] Frosh P. (2018) The Poetics of Digital Media. MA: Polity Press.

[18] Galyamina YE. (2014) Linguistic analysis of Twitter hashtags. Languages of Slavic culture: 13-22.

[19] Geismar H. (2012) Museum+Digital=?. In: Horst H and Miler D (eds). Digital Anthropologicy. London: Berg, pp. 266-287.

[20] Grainge P. (2002) Monochrome Memories: Nostalgia and Style in Retro America. Westport and London: Praeger.

[21] Guidry JD, Austin LL, Freberg K and Cacciatore M. (2018) Welcome or Not: Comparing #Refugee Posts on Instagram and Pinterest. American Behavioral Scientists 62(4): 512-531.

[22] Hammersley M. (2013) What is Qualitative Research?. London: Bloonsburry Academic.

[23] Hapsoro LS (2018). Beyond the “lulz”: Audience engagement with political memes in the case of Indonesia. Masters’ Thesis, Lund University, Netherlands.

[24] Hepworth K. (2016) History, power and visual communication artefacts. Rethinking History 20(2): 280-302.

[25] Heryanto A and Hadiz VR. (2005) Post-authoritarian Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies 37(2): 251-275.

[26] Hine C. (2020) The Evolution and Diversification of Twitter as a Cultural Artefact in the British Press 2007–2014. Journalism Studies 21(5): 678-696.

[27] Höijer B. (2011) Social Representations Theory A New Theory for Media Research. Nordicom Review 32(2): 3-16.

[28] John P. (2013) All tools are informational now: how information and persuasion define the tools of government. Policy and Politics 41(4): 605-620.

[29] Kailani N and Slama M (2020) Accelerating Islamic charities in Indonesia: zakat , sedekah and the immediacy of social media. South East Asia Research 28(2): 1-17.

[30] Kissas A. (2020) Performative and ideological populism: The case of charismatic leaders on Twitter. Discourse & Society 31(3): 268-284.

[31] Kores MA. (2020) Powerful posters: A multimodal analysis of Slovenia’s 2018 parliamentary elections. Ars & Humanitas 14(1): 105-124.

[32] Kuo R. (2018) Racial justice activist hashtags: Counterpublics and discourse circulation. New Media & Society 20(2): 495-514.

[33] Kristeva J. (1984) Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. New York: Columbia University Press.

[34] Lee B and Campbell V. (2016) Looking out or turning in? Organizational Ramifications of online political posters in Facebook. The International journal of Press/Politics 21(3): 313-337.

[35] Lesmana M. (2021) A Critical Reading of Arabic Internet Memes against Patriarchal Systems. Journal of International Women's Studies 22(5): 333-346.

[36] Lim M (2017) Digital Media and Malaysia's Electoral Reform Movement. In: Berenshot W, Nordholt HS and Bakker L (eds) Citizenship and Democratization in Southeast Asia. Leiden: Brill, pp.211-237.

[37] Lucas G (2012) Understanding the Archaeological Record. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[38] Macey D (2000) The Penguin Dictionary of Critical Theory. London: Penguin Reference Books.

[39] Marková I (2003) Dialogicality and Social Representations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[40] Moleong LJ and Surjaman T. (2018) Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja.

[41] Moscovici S. (2000) Social Representations. Explorations in Social Psychology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

[42] Neumayer C and Rossi L. (2018) Images of protest in social media: Struggle over visibility and visual narratives. New Media & Society 20(11): 4293-4310.

[43] Nyíri K. (2016) Conservatism and Common-Sense Realism. The Monist 99(4): 441-456.

[44] Ott B and Walter C. (2000) Intertextuality: Interpretive practiceand textual strategy. Critical Studies in Media Communication 17(4): 429-446.

[45] Pehe V. (2015) The colours of socialism: visual nostalgia and retroaesthetics in Czech film and television. Canadian Slavonic Papers 57(3-4): 239-253.

[46] Rataeu P, Moliner P, Guimelli C and Jean-Claude A. (2012) Social Representation Theory. In: Kruglanski AW, Higgins ET and van Lange P (eds) Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology. London: SAGE Publications, pp. 477-497.

[47] Ratliff TN and Hall L. (2014) Practicing the Art of Dissent: Toward a Typology of Protest Activity in the United States. Humanity & Society 38(3): 268-294.

[48] Repko AF and Szostak R (2021). Interdisciplinary Research: Process and Theory. SAGE Publications.

[49] Reyes A. (2011) Strategies of legitimization in political discourse: From words to actions. Discourse & Society 22(6): 781-807.

[50] Riello G. (2009) Things that shape history: material culture and historical narratives. In: Harvey K (ed) History and material culture : a student's guide to approaching alternative sources. London: Routledge, pp. 24-47.

[51] Shanks M. (2012). An Archaeological Narratology. In: Shanks M (ed). The Archaeological Imagination. California: Left Coast Press, pp. 127–144.

[52] Shanks M and Tilley C. (1993) Re-constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice (New Studies in Archaeology. London & New York: Routledge.

[53] Sinpeng A. (2019) Digital media, political authoritarianism, and Internet controls in Southeast Asia. Singapore: ISEAS-Yusif Ishak Institute.

[54] Sinpeng A and Tapsell R. (2020). From Grassroots activism to disinformation: social media trends in Southeast Asia. Singapore: ISEAS-Yusif Ishak Institute.

[55] Soh WY. (2020) Digital protest in Singapore: the pragmatics of political Internet memes. Media, Culture & Society 42(7-8): 1115-1132.

[55] Steffan D and Venema N. (2020) New medium, old strategies? Comparing online and traditional campaign posters for German Bundestag elections, 2013-2017. European Journal of Communication 35(4): 370-388.

[56] Suwana F. (2019). What motivates digital activism? The case of the Save KPK movement in Indonesia. Information.Communication & Society 23(9): 1295-1310.

[57] Thornton PM. (2002) Framing Dissent in Contemporary China: Irony, Ambiguity and Metonymy. The China Quarterly 171: 661-681.

[58] Uimonen P. (2020) #MeToo in Sweden: Museum Collections, Digital Archiving and Hashtag Visuality. Ethnos 85(5): 920-937.

[59] Van Leeuwen T. (2007) Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse and Communication 1(1): 91–112.

[60] Winkler CG. The evolution of the conservative mainstream in Japan. Japan Forum 24(1): 51-73. (2012)

[61] Woodward I. (2007) Understanding Material Culture. London: Sage Publications.

[62] Young S. (2020) Citizens of photography: Visual activism, social media and rhetoric of collective action in Cambodia. South East Asia Research (Sept 2020): 1-35.