Political Communication Strategy in Realizing Deliberative Democracy: A Study of @bijakmemilih.id on the Website and X (Twitter) During the 2024 Election
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22437/jssh.v10i2.57918Keywords:
civic technology, deliberative democracy, digital public sphere, hybrid media system, political communicationAbstract
The 2024 Indonesian General Election witnessed a severe deliberative degradation within the digital public sphere, heavily distorted by affective polarization, information disorder, and algorithmic bias across mainstream social media. This study evaluates the political communication strategy of the independent civic technology platform @bijakmemilih.id in mitigating this structural crisis and restructuring cyber-discourses for young voters. Drawing upon Jürgen Habermas’s theory of deliberative democracy and Andrew Chadwick’s hybrid media system framework, a qualitative case study design was employed. Methodological triangulation was operationalized by integrating netnographic observations, in-depth interviews with key platform initiators, communication experts, and users, along with computational text mining via RapidMiner on substantive replies from key X (formerly Twitter) threads. The results demonstrate that @bijakmemilih.id successfully orchestrated a two-tiered communication strategy, functionalizing platform X as a fast-paced horizontal distribution channel for agenda-setting, while maintaining the official website as a deeply anchored vertical data repository. Interactivity emerged as the absolute dominant indicator in public discourse (31.7%), successfully transforming passive youth consumption into proactive communicative action through debate propositions and structural recommendations. Inclusivity (25.9%) was strategically achieved by deploying issue-based interactive features that effectively deconstructed embedded partisan tribalism. Accessibility (21.7%) developed independently via organic digital word-of-mouth distribution channels. Although rationality (20.6%) registered the lowest quantitative frequency, it generated the highest substantive conversational weight, utilizing objective track records as a crucial cognitive literacy shield against the manipulation of cyber troops. This study concludes that non-partisan, data-driven civic tech initiatives can effectively facilitate a healthy, inclusive, and rational deliberative digital public sphere amidst heavily commercialized media ecosystems.
References
Aragón, P., Kaltenbrunner, A., Calleja-López, A., Pereira, A., Gómez, V., & Miralbell, O. (2017). Deliberation in platform-mediated civic engagement: A data-driven exploration of civic tech. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 14(4), 307–322.
Alifah, N. (2026). The role of social media in shaping public discourse among Generation Z: Trends, challenges, and implications. Jurnal ASPIKOM, 11(1), 57–69.
Boyd, d. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). Routledge.
Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
Eveland, W. P. (2001). The cognitive mediation model of learning from the news: Evidence from nonelection, off-year election, and presidential election contexts. Communication Research, 28(5), 571–601.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. MIT Press.
Habermas, J. (2023). A new structural transformation of the public sphere and deliberative politics. Polity Press.
Kozinets, R. V. (2020). Netnography: The essential guide to qualitative social media research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Latief, I. S., & Tripuspita, N. (2024). Political education in the digital era to encourage first-time voter participation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Social Sciences in Education (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 71–76).
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176–187.
McNair, B. (2003). An introduction to political communication (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Meutuah, T. M., & Abdurrahman, A. (2024). Platform digital dan kesadaran politik kolektif pemilih pemula pada Pemilu 2024. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, 27(2), 112–128.
Oksanen, A., Celuch, M., Oksa, R., & Savolainen, I. (2024). Online communities come with real-world consequences for individuals and societies. Communications Psychology, 2(1), Article 71.
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press.
Rachman, A., & Hasfi, N. (2023). Dinamika ruang publik digital: Analisis deliberasi netizen pada isu politik elektoral. Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 20(1), 15–30.
Rawls, J. (1997). The idea of public reason revisited. The University of Chicago Law Review, 64(3), 765–807.
Wahyudi, M., Ngarawula, B., & Prianto, B. (2024). Generation Z voter behavior: Case study of Generation Z voter behavior ahead of the 2024 Surabaya City regional head election. International Journal of Research in Social Science and Humanities, 5(12), 10–35. https://doi.org/10.47505/IJRSS
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Kirana Anindya Saffa, Muhammad Prakoso Aji
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
