Negotiating Power in Public Policy Discourse on Social Media a Critical Discourse Analysis of Government Institutional Posts

Authors

  • Ikmal Muhammad Universitas Khairun
  • Darlisa Muhamad Universitas Khairun

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/jldl.v4i2.15366

Keywords:

Critical Discourse Analysis, Public Policy, Social Media, Government Institutions, Power Negotiation

Abstract

This study investigates how government institutions use social media as a site of power negotiation in public policy communication. Employing a qualitative approach with Fairclough’s three-dimensional Critical Discourse Analysis and multimodal analysis, data were drawn from 80 purposively selected government account uploads over six months. Systematic coding and interpretive categorization reveal that institutions employ linguistic framing, persuasive rhetoric, and visual semiotics to legitimize authority, foster compliance, and shape public perception, while simultaneously encountering counter-discourses in community interactions. The findings demonstrate that institutional discourse on social media functions not only as policy dissemination but also as a dynamic arena of legitimacy, resistance, and trust-building. This research contributes theoretically to critical discourse studies by linking digital communication and institutional authority, and practically by offering insights for enhancing transparency and public participation in policy communication.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agustriani, F., & Hamdani, R. (2023). Retorika otoritas dalam pemberitaan kebijakan daerah. Jurnal Komunikasi Publik, 12(2), 115–128.

Al Akromi, M., & Santika, D. (2024). Framing visual dan bahasa simbolik dalam komunikasi pemerintah digital. Jurnal Linguistik Media, 9(1), 33–47.

Critical Discourse Analysis. (2025). Critical discourse analysis in digital governance: A methodological overview. Journal of Language and Power Studies, 14(1), 1–12.

I Gusti Ngurah Parthama, A., Suryawan, M., & Lestari, P. (2025). Resistensi digital masyarakat terhadap kebijakan publik di media sosial. Jurnal Politik dan Wacana, 7(1), 55–70.

Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2020). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Kurniawan, A., Prasetyo, H., & Lestari, D. (2021). Diskursus kebijakan PSBB di media daring pemerintah. Jurnal Kajian Komunikasi, 19(3), 201–215.

Liu, H. (2024). Digital discourse and institutional legitimacy: A multimodal perspective. Journal of Critical Discourse Research, 5(2), 77–94.

Mendelsohn, J., Clarke, R., & Nguyen, T. (2024). Trust and authority in online government communication: A discourse analysis. Journal of Digital Communication Studies, 11(1), 44–60.

Nishi, K. (2021). Contesting power in government communication on Twitter. Asian Journal of Media Studies, 8(2), 89–104.

Pratap, R., & Pathak, S. (2025). Echo chambers in public discourse: Implications for policy communication. Journal of Social Media and Society, 13(1), 22–36.

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Sari, M., Nugroho, Y., & Fitriani, R. (2025). Media sosial sebagai ruang negosiasi kekuasaan. Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi Digital, 10(1), 1–15.

Taggart, P., & Lennox, C. (2024). Persuasive strategies in pandemic discourse: A multimodal approach. Journal of Language, Politics and Society, 12(3), 210–225.

Ugwudike, P., & Sánchez-Benitez, C. (2024). Counter-narratives and marginalized voices in online public policy debates. Journal of Critical Policy Studies, 15(2), 98–113.

Wijaya, R., & Ida, R. (2022). Wacana resistensi masyarakat terhadap kebijakan COVID-19 di media sosial. Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia, 11(2), 145–160.

Zhao, Y., & Jiang, W. (2023). Public interaction and digital authority on Chinese government social media. Journal of Asian Communication, 17(1), 50–66.

Published

2025-10-01

How to Cite

Muhammad, I., & Muhamad, D. . (2025). Negotiating Power in Public Policy Discourse on Social Media a Critical Discourse Analysis of Government Institutional Posts. Journal of Language Development and Linguistics, 4(2), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.55927/jldl.v4i2.15366