Political Communication Model in Indonesian Parliament
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2018.0139.140-159Keywords:
political communication, political symbolic interaction, communication violence, political stageAbstract
The main objective of this study was to determine the model of political communication in the Indonesian parliament. The phenomenon of political communication using 'violence', occurred in Indonesian parliament period 1999-2004. This research was conducted with qualitative analysis, by developing interactionist theory, constructive, symbolic interaction in the political sphere. The results found that political communication in Indonesian parliament cannot be conceived as direct communication because the communication is interactional and transactional. Therefore, every political message is ultimately between interests and disagreements. It can build a conceptual model in which ‘violence’ in the delivery of political messages physically or psychologically occurs on the ‘front stage', 'middle stage’ and ‘backstage’.
References
Anderson, R. (2014). Playing the fool: Activists’ performances of emotion in policy making spaces. Emotion, Space and Society, 13, 16-23. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2014.05.004
Awofadeju, P. O., Adeyemo, A. L., Kwembili, C., & Adesanya, A. (2015). Political Violence and Media Coverage in Nigeria: An Analysis of Nigerian Tribune and Punch Newspapers of 2011 General Elections in Osun State. Int'l J. Advanced Legal Stud. & Governance, 5, 79.
Bello, S. K. (2015). Political and electoral violence in nigeria: Mapping, evolution and patterns (june 2006-may 2014). IFRA-Nigeria Working paper Series.
Bimber, B. (2014). Digital media in the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the personalized political communication environment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 11(2), 130-150. DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2014.895691
Blumler, J. G., & Kavanagh, D. (1999). The third age of political communication: Influences and features. Political communication, 16(3), 209-230.
Caballero, F. S., & Gravante, T. (2018). Introduction. In Networks, Movements and Technopolitics in Latin America (pp. 1-14). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65560-4
Castells, M. (2013). Communication power. OUP Oxford.
Chamberlain-Salaun, J., Mills, J., & Usher, K. (2013). Linking symbolic interactionism and grounded theory methods in a research design: from Corbin and Strauss’ assumptions to action. SAGE open, 3(3). DOI: 10.1177/2158244013505757
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks.
Dalal, A. K., & Priya, K. R. (2016). Introduction to qualitative research. Qualitative Research on Illness, Wellbeing and Self-Growth: Contemporary Indian Perspectives. New Delhi: Routledge.
Eadie, W. F. (2011). Stories we tell: Fragmentation and convergence in communication disciplinary history. Review of Communication, 11(3), 161-176.
Edelman, M. (2013). Political language: Words that succeed and policies that fail. Elsevier.
Eid, M., & Paré, D. (2008). Mapping communication and media studies in canada. Global Media Journal Canadian Edition, 1(1), 3-7.
Eveland Jr, W. P., Hayes, A. F., Shah, D. V., & Kwak, N. (2005). Understanding the relationship between communication and political knowledge: A model comparison approach using panel data. Political Communication, 22(4), 423-446. DOI: 10.1080/10584600500311345
Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication theory, 16(4), 411-426. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x
Hallett, T., & Meanwell, E. (2016). Accountability as an inhabited institution: Contested meanings and the symbolic politics of reform. Symbolic Interaction, 39(3), 374-396. DOI: 10.1002/SYMB.241
Ibrahim, S. G., Liman, A., & Uke, I. I. (2013). The Behavioural Science in Law Making Process: A Psychological Approach to Understanding Legislative Violence. The Social Sciences, 8(2), 123-128.
Jansen, S. C. (2010). Forgotten histories: Another road not taken – The Charles MerriamWalterLippmann correspondence. Communication Theory, 20, 127–146. DOI: 10.1111=j.1468-2885.2010.01357.x
Kriesi, Hanspeter. (2013). Introduction – The New Challenges to Democracy. In Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization (pp. 1-18). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Loseke, D. R. (2016). Symbolic Interaction and Narrative Productions of Meaning in Public Spaces. In The A structural Bias Charge: Myth or Reality? (pp. 123-144). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S0163-239620160000046026
Loseke, D. R., & Kusenbach, M. (2008). The social construction of emotion. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 511-530). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2013). A service science perspective on business model innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(5), 665-670. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.05.007
Malin, B. J. (2011). Not just your average beauty: Carl seashore and the history of communication research in the United States. Communication Theory, 21, 299–316. DOI: 10.1111=j.1468-2885.2011.01383.x
Martin, J. T. (2015). Policing an Occupied Legislature: Symbolic Struggle over the Police Image in Taiwan's Sunflower Movement. Hong Kong LJ, 45, 229.
McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political communication, 16(3), 315-336.
McNair, B. (2011). An introduction to political communication. USA: Routledge.
Oyesomi, K. O., & Oyero, O. (2012). Newspaper Coverage of Women's Participation in the 2011 General Elections in Nigeria. The Nigerian Journal of Communication, 10(1), 136-156.
Pickard, V. (2015). Charles Siepmann’s forgotten legacy for communication research and media policy. The International History of Communication Study, 256.
Prus, R. (2003). Policy as a collective venture: A symbolic interactionist approach to the study of organizational directives. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23(6/7), 13-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443330310790589
Reese, S. D., & Ballinger, J. (2001). The roots of a sociology of news: Remembering Mr. Gates and social control in the newsroom. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(4), 641-658.
Sapienza, Z. S., Iyer, N., & Veenstra, A. S. (2015). Reading Lasswell’s Model of Communication Backward: Three Scholarly Misconceptions. Mass Communication and Society, 18(5), 599-622. DOI: 10.1080/15205436.2015.1063666
Scheufele, D. A. (2000). Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication & Society, 3(2-3), 297-316.
Shah, D. V., McLeod, D. M., Rojas, H., Cho, J., Wagner, M. W., & Friedland, L. A. (2017). Revising the communication mediation model for a new political communication ecology. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 491-504. DOI:10.1111/hcre.12115
Simonson, P., Peck, J., Craig, R. T., & Jackson, J. P. (2013). The history of communication history. The handbook of communication history, 13-57.
Thompson, A., Potrac, P., & Jones, R. (2015). ‘I found out the hard way’: Micro-political workings in professional football. Sport, education and society, 20(8), 976-994. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2013.862786
Unoka, Z., & Vizin, G. (2017). To see in a mirror dimly. The looking glass self is self-shaming in borderline personality disorder. Psychiatry Research, 258, 322-329. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2017.08.055
Wijaya, B. S. (2016). The ‘Realness’ Discourse of a Political Leader: A Komunikasi Berasa Perspective. Journal of Government and Politics, 7(2), 310-340. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0032
Yayasan, A. P. I. (2001). Panduan Parlemen Indonesia [Guide of Parliament Indonesia]. Jakarta: Yayasan API.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Studi Pemerintahan is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.
