In contrast to the 2014 presidential election, in 2019 social media played an important role during the presidential elections (see figure 2). Social media was used as a counterweight to the mainstream media that served in the 2014 election (H2). In this case, social media is neutral and impartial. Besides, in the 2019 presidential election, most voters had become social media users. In 2019, both candidates attracted new voters such as young voters through a social media campaign. The campaign team was created the best content on social media to attract the attention of young voters.

Figure 2

(Do you think social media played a role in 2019 elections?)

3.2.1.1 Mainstream media in 2014, social media in 2019

The mainstream media was the main platform used for election campaigns in 2014. The use of political communication strategies with direct campaigns is one of the strategies to attract public attention. The conventional campaign pattern in 2014 was a direct campaign of bringing together candidates and voters. Meanwhile, at the national level, politicians and professional advisors conduct polls, design advertisements, set campaign themes and campaign tour schedules through roadshows, did press conferences to display news and photos and purchased most of the major hours of television to influence voters.

Meanwhile, in 2019 social media became the main campaign tool of both candidates. Social media was used to retain the followers of each candidate since the election in 2014. Each candidate used social media to convey ideologies to the public. This was done to communicate directly to the public through social media. This is proven that each candidate active to do some activities on Twitter. Besides, the winning team of each candidate also made special content on social media such as infographics and videos to display the vision and mission content and achievements. Each team had a daily agenda of raising some issues on social media.

However, optimizing communication strategies through big data-based on social media to reach voters is the straight strategy to attract the attention of voters especially among young voters. In 2019, it was dominated by new voters, mostly young people. To that end, social media was an appropriate means to carry out campaigns without having to go through conventional methods such as in 2014. Direct campaigns were only done once in 2019 because most of the campaigns have been carried out on social media.

The platforms used by the two candidates were Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Website. For example, on Twitter incumbent used the hashtag #JokowiforPresident, while the opposition used the hashtag #2019chagethePresident. Through social media campaigns, each candidate attacked the personal lives of the opponents.



3.2.1.2 The difference between two campaign: 2014 was about getting supporters, while 2019 was mostly about retaining them

There are differences in establishing followers in the 2014 and 2019 elections. Forming followers and supporters were an important matter in the presidential election in 2014. Once more, the media plays an important role in introducing candidates. The combination of party machines and charismatic leadership was the reference for winning the 2014 presidential election. The intended party meant the party that supported the candidate, while the charismatic leadership clearly had by a leader to attract the public attention.

At this stage, the leadership factor is still very much considered. This is because this year the public must still get to know the new presidential candidate. For this reason, it is important to create a good image among the public for a candidate. And this year there is no term incumbent or opposition in the presidential election.

On the one hand, in 2019, it was important to retain and maintaining social media followers from the 2014 elections. The supporters of both candidates are also quite solid. Then, for candidates who could get new voters is an additional matter to win the election. Meanwhile, another factor that was different from 2014 and 2019 is the use of identity politics in the 2019 elections which was increasingly massive. It was driven by the development of the internet and the use of social media during campaigns. It was higher during the 2019 elections as compared to the 2014 elections.

The use of identity politics through social media in 2019 encourages the formation of polarization in social media between two camps (incumbent and opposition) and forms a public opinion about both candidates which can be either positive or negative or even criticizes. From this opinion, it tends to form divisions between each supporter.



3.2.2 Result 2: Some factors have contributed to the role of social media in 2019: Increased voter participation, created polarization in social media, created public opinion and facilitated campaign strategies

Between 2014 and 2019 the penetration of the internet and social media became higher. APJII (2019) estimates that around 170 million internet users in Indonesia are the most active users of social media such as Facebook, which is still the highest and it is followed by other social media such as Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and so on. Social media in 2019 has a role in increasing voter participation, especially new voters. New voters are defined as people who were skeptical in the 2014 election against the presidential election and decided not to vote. Through social media, politicians succeed in attracting new voters. Evidently, voter participation increased significantly from 69.58 percent to 81.97 percent. The number of votes for the two candidates increased by around 20 million compared to the 2014 presidential election.

Polarization in social media was used by politicians as an excuse to avoid serious debates in the mainstream media such as policy and ideological issues. Indonesia has not experienced a divisive political campaign or polarization. But, social media discourse created people feel the potential for polarization is greater than it really is -- and politicians continue to inflame that perception. In the 2019 Presidential Election, both the opposition team and the incumbent clearly had a buzzer team that created discourse, counteracted -- or even produced -- material for "black campaigns" in cyberspace. Social media easily triggers conflict because of the low literacy rate in Indonesia, especially on political issues. For this reason, the actual polarization in the 2019 election was the polarization of social media which saw a very split between the two support teams of each candidate.

Also, social media plays an important role in creating public opinion. In 2019, this has been proven by dividing community support in such a sharp way. Social media plays a role in the campaign and makes competition between candidates more explicit. Thus, people will be interested in starting to make political choices, even openly showing their support on social media. Social media has become an effective communication medium used by politicians to introduce themselves, convey their vision and mission and influence voter preferences. On the other hand, voters use social media to get to know and interact with politicians.

3.2.2.1 Social media facilitated digitalization campaign strategies in 2019

There are two factors in the use of social media as a political campaign media. First, it is accessible to voters. The number of social media users in Indonesia increase dramatically every year, people started a turn to social media to access any information, especially political information. At this stage, the candidate tends to utilize social media to provide their political ideologies and several campaign programs to attract voter attention. Second, it allows in two-way communication interaction between candidates and voters through social media. Candidates easily answer questions raised by voters through social media about programs and political ideology. So this makes the campaign on social media not feel like a campaign but rather like a direct discussion between politicians and the public.

There was a slight change in political preferences in 2019. The most important factor to attract people's attention and get a good image was campaign strategies. This is done by candidates through ideologies conveyed on social media. In addition, it can be recognized that the party's identity in Indonesia is getting lower, the compilation of voters sees the candidate's background on political identity. In addition, another factor in the presidential election is the coattail effect. Legislative and presidential elections held simultaneously bring blessings to the main emcee. Because put together, voter participation was almost the same at that time. Then, there was a significant increase in votes in several parties supporting the president and vice president.

In addition, in the 2019 elections, the use of social media in campaigns was more regulated. KPU stipulates that every election participant (politician) can use a maximum of 10 official accounts on each social media platform. Bawaslu as an election oversight institution to prevent violations supervise and the crackdown on campaign violations through social media, in collaboration with the Ministry of Communication and Information (Kemenkominfo), and organizers of social media platforms such as Facebook, Bigoo, Twitter, Line, Google. Collaboration related to monitoring content on social media with follow-up from content takes down to take down content disseminating accounts that violate campaign rules.

3.2.2.2 Digital campaign strategies from both candidates

The Opposition (Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno) almost had no access to mainstream media. On the other hand, Joko Widodo as incumbent benefited in the mainstream media. In addition, some media owners also have to determine their support for the incumbent.

In general, the incumbent's electability was higher than the opposition. The campaign strategy of the incumbent through social media was to form a special digital team to create special content in social media about programs and achievements of campaign strategies. The content carried should be neatly arranged and systematically arrange for infographics and videos. However, the problem with this campaign strategy is that it is difficult to make systematic content go viral on social media. The incumbent team did not much do interaction on social media. This is because incumbent electability is superior among the people. Thus, the incumbent team believes that the incumbent can win the election for the second time.

Digital content for campaigns was tailored to each platform. As an example, on the Instagram memes and videos were uploaded. On Facebook, a fan page account had wider outreach than a personal account. On Twitter, it still relies on the hashtag to win the election such as with a hashtag of #01Indonesiamaju.

On the other hand, the opposition used alternatives to social media. The opposition team did not create special content for digital campaigns. The strategy was to form a social media division in each department - a total of 15 departments. For example, in the largest department named the “BPN Volunteer Departments”, there were 1.300 volunteer groups coordinate millions of volunteers in all provinces. Every volunteer registered officially at BPN must have a social media account and share positive campaign content regarding the opposition.

Even though they do not have a centralized digital team, the movement to win the opposition shows a solid pattern. This is supported by the release of the Muslim Cyber ??Army (MCA). MCA was a group that won the governor election in Jakarta in 2018. There are also some hashtags created by the winning team of the opposition on social media for example #2019PrabowoPresidenRI.

The opposition also used certain moments for viral content. For example, the campaign, which was attended by thousands of people, was photographed and share on social media in hope of it going to viral https://twitter.com/prabowo(13/02/2019). Besides, the opposition also invited young influencers in Indonesia to join the opposition team. As a result, each influencer join the community of the opposition team to share their support on social media accounts. In general, the team of opposition interacted more with the public through platforms on social media to attract the attention of voters, especially young voters who are active on social media.

3.2.3 Conclusion of the interview results

Based on the findings of the expert interviews that have been presented above and answered by the hypothesis that was made earlier. From the answers of interviews by ten participants, it can be concluded that social media does not have a significant role in the 2014 presidential election. This is because the mainstream media is still the main reference for candidates to carry out political campaigns and convey ideologies and approach the public. While on the part of the voters, the public still makes mainstream media such as television and newspapers to receive and consume information and political news, especially around the presidential election. In addition, it is important for candidates to form followers in the 2014 election through the formation of a positive image for each candidate.

Meanwhile in the 2019 presidential election, social media tends to be bigger and was used as a tool to facilitate political campaigns. The public began to move to social media to consume political news, especially the election. Certainly not surprised if each candidate provides a different strategy in a digital campaign. With a special strategy to attract the attention of voters. And it should be noted that it is important for candidates to retain followers in the 2019 election. Because the candidates already have experience in the 2014 elections. For this reason, it is important for them to retain and even attract new voters especially young voters through social media.

3.3 Discussion of results from social media data

In this part several findings from the social media data will be discussed. Two social media platforms (Facebook and Twitter) are different in the form of content in the form of a medium for delivering information. Twitter tends to contain delivering buzzing information, while Facebook contains long and clear narrative of each candidates. The results obtained from analysis of social media showed that the incumbent (Joko Widodo) was more active on two social media platforms (Facebook and Twitter) compared to the opposition (Prabowo Subianto) (H2a).

Table 2: Topic/content selected from Facebook and Twitter

Topic	Explanation
Social	Social content is a form of activity or interaction carried out by politicians both directly and virtually. This topic also contained forms of direct campaign activities (events) by each candidates.
Infrastructure	Infrastructure is a form of development that is currently or has been carried out. This content also includes a mainstay program owned by incumbent in the past five years as President.
Ideology	Ideology is a form of personal message created by both candidates which means that the ideas are conveyed as a form of campaign idea.
Economy	The economy is a topic raised regarding the improvement of the Indonesian economy in several sectors such as industry, agriculture and export import.
Other	Another form of posting that does not included in the classified content.

From the results of content analysis on social media, there are four main topics from two platforms, Facebook and Twitter (Table 2). These four topics are included in the following table with an explanation of the form of posts contained in the each content. In addition, no content (no posted) is also included in the graphic presentation. The contents of the two social media platforms are loaded into graphics will support result 5 (H2a). It stated that the two candidates have different strategies in digital campaigns. And also the topics raised on Facebook and Twitter are the same.

3.3.1 Result of Facebook data

Analysis of data obtained from Facebook contains five main contents including other content and no content (no posted). The five contents get a place on Facebook are social, infrastructure, ideology, economics and other content that is not included in the four special content. However the results of the analysis show that incumbent (Joko Widodo) was more active in using Facebook as a tool for conducting digital campaigns compared to the opposition (Prabowo Subianto).

3.3.1.1 Facebook data of Joko Widodo

Figure 3

From a total of 90 posts obtained from 2019, 35 of them at least get attention on social issues. Social issues as a dominant content at 35% of the total (see figure 4). Social content is a form of attraction for candidates to attract the attention of voters through social media. From posts posted through social issues, it includes forms of campaigns carried out by politicians such as conducting visits to several remote areas. In addition, incumbent also focused on posting on Facebook about the development issue. Infrastructure content supports development issues. However, development issues in Indonesia still should be highly considered. To that end, the issue of development is one of the incumbent superior programs to draw the attention of the public to the achievements made by the government over the past five years when he served as President. The percentage of infrastructure topics is 20%. As a politician, incumbent is also active in conveying his personal ideas. This is contained in ideology content which takes 13 posts out of a total of 90 posts with a percentage of 14%. The ideological content also includes political campaign messages from the incumbent.

The incumbent was also actively discussing economic issues on his Facebook account. This is evidenced in the results of Facebook data analysis which shows that eight of the total posts are discussing the issue of the development of the Indonesian economy. One popular issue is Indonesia's economic growth which continues to increasing dramatically every year https://www.facebook.com/Jokowi/ (08/02/2019). Other content that is not included in the content specialization is also contained in Joko Widodo's account posting and received 2% attention with a total of two posts. Besides, the incumbent (Joko Widodo) also did not make post every day on his Facebook account, this can be seen from the percentage of no content on his account by 14% with a total of 16%. Of course, none of this content gets a bigger place than the ideology is one of the superior content owned by incumbent.

Figure 4

As a result of the analysis of Facebook data, it shows that incumbent (Joko Widodo) is active in making posts on Facebook look neat and orderly. This is shown by its activity to make posts almost every day during the three months of the campaign period or three months before the election. Especially more inclined to social issues, namely incumbents who greet more people to convey ideas of political campaigns.

3.3.1.2 Facebook data of Prabowo Subianto

Figure 5

Digital campaigns from the opposition (Prabowo Subianto) tend to be more passive compared to the incumbent (Joko Widodo). This can be seen from the analysis of Facebook data from the opposition which only has two content on social media. Figure 5 shows that Prabowo Subianto's Facebook account has the largest percentage of graphs with no content 53% (see figure 6) and served 48 days with no content out of total. On the other hand, his personal account shows that the opposition actively does campaigning for social programs such as visits to various regions in Indonesia to meet his supporters. This is supported by one of several contents on his personal account describe that he was visiting lower class people in one of the remote areas in Indonesia https://www.facebook.com/PrabowoSubianto/(24/02/2019).

This social content gets the attention of 29 posts and 32% of the total.

In addition, the opposition also placed a focus on ideological issues. As an ex former Indonesian army fighter on a new order of Indonesia in 1998, Prabowo Subianto conveyed some political ideas about the importance of maintaining an ideology for every Indonesian as a big nation https://www.facebook.com/PrabowoSubianto/(06/02/2019). The ideological content by his personal accounts was obtained by 13 posts with percentage at 15%.

Figure 6

In general, by his Facebook account, the opposition does not focus to create special content to load news and some main issues surrounding the campaign through Facebook. Meanwhile, he was focusing on Facebook to convey some social campaign activities during the three-month of the campaign period.

3.3.2 Result of Twitter data

At the stage of data analysis on the Twitter accounts of each candidate, it contains four contents (social, infrastructure, ideology) including other content and one place for no content. The results obtained are broadly the same as analysis of Facebook data. In general, the incumbent more active using Twitter as a tool for digital campaign compared to the opposition.

3.3.2.1 Twitter data of Joko Widodo

Figure 7

In contrast to Facebook, on Twitter the incumbent's personal account (Joko Widodo) focuses more on spreading posts with infrastructure content. This can be seen from figure 7 with a total of 35 posts from a total of 90 tweets with a percentage of 39% (see figure 8). The content on Twitter Joko Widodo is rooted in the fact that he is superior as incumbent. And in this case he proves with the work programs he has achieved in the past five years as President. For this reason, content of infrastructure has received great attention from the community as voters. As one example of the incumbent program is the construction of public transportation MRT in Jakarta https://twitter.com/jokowi(25/03/2019).

In social content gets second place by 31% with a total of 28 out of total tweets. The incumbent (Joko Widodo) is also active in the social topic because President has to carry out forms of social activities such as visits to domestic and international. However, on social content, Joko Widodo is more focused on visiting regions in Indonesia as a form of campaign activity. Activities undertaken such as the example of visiting victims of natural disasters in one remote area in Indonesia https://twitter.com/jokowi(20/01/2019). The incumbent was also active in conveying his personal ideas on Twitter that are not related to social activities or infrastructure development in Indonesia. Ideological content has a place of 6% with a total of 5 posts tweets. And in the form of other content, two out of a total of 90 tweets with a percentage of 2%.

Figure 8

In general, from the Twitter data presentation, the incumbent (Joko Widodo) actively gave tweets every day and was not active for certain days. This is evidenced by the percentage of no smaller content with the percentage of special content such as social and infrastructure, which is 22%.

3.3.2.2 Twitter data of Prabowo Subianto

Figure 9

Out of the total 90 posts in 2019, the opposition looks passive on his personal account. This is evidenced by the percentage of no larger content compared to special content. No content gets 61 places out of a total with a percentage of 68% (see figure 10). From the data obtained, Prabowo Subianto several times posted social content in the form of activities to meet with supporters as a form that he interacted with prospective voters in several regions in Indonesia. One of the social activities that received the spotlight was visiting middle-class people in Purbalingga, East Java Indonesia https://twitter.com/prabowo(13/02/2019). From the data obtained of social content got a place at 22% (see figure 10) with a total of 20 tweets. In addition, as a politician, the opposition also expressed his ideas about politics in Indonesia. Analysis of the data found is 9% in this content with 8 tweets from a total of 90 tweets.

In addition, the topic of infrastructure was also found in Prabowo Subianto's Twitter account. This content gets 1 tweet with a percentage of 1% of the total. The form of the tweet presented is in the form of describing a picture of development in Papua as one of the remote areas in Indonesia https://twitter.com/prabowo(24/03/2019).

Figure 10

3.3.2 Conclusion of the social media data results

Based on the presentation of empirical data through social media, in general incumbent (Joko Widodo) is superior in presenting material and preparing for the tactics of digital campaigns compared to the opposition (Prabowo Subianto). Judging from the content posting via Facebook, Joko Widodo is more active in creating content every day by containing various specific activities that can attract the attention of voters. On Facebook, Joko Widodo put more emphasis on social content. While on Twitter he is active in the topic of infrastructure. In general, this can be seen in the circle of social media users in Indonesia. In Facebook, it tends to contain old voters, therefore it is fitting to see that incumbents emphasize social topics. Whereas on Twitter which contains more young voters, it makes sense if incumbents raise the topic of infrastructure which tends to be bigger to be discussed among scholars and young voters.

From the graphics and data presentation found on opposition social media (Prabowo Subianto), his presentation is very far from the incumbent. The opposition is very passive on social media, it looks like a greater percentage of no content than other content. To that end, from the discussion of social media data, it can be concluded that it is possible incumbents won the presidential election for the second time. The interactions and activities made on social media, Facebook, and Twitter as the evidence of his actions.



CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSIONS

This final chapter summarizes the results of data analysis, discussion and empirical findings. Furthermore, this study presents the implications of the findings in the context of a broader literature on social media and elections. Next, by revisiting the examination question it recognizes the commitment that this exploration made to the present condition of knowledge in the particular space. At long last, the examination suggestions and fields for additional investigation are sketched out for different scholastics and specialists.

4.1 Summary of the results

From the results of research that has been done, found several findings. First, the important role of social media is in shaping political campaign strategies. Politicians use social media as a tool to convey political ideas through digital campaigns. Second, in the 2014 elections, the mainstream media was still used as a campaign tool. However, in 2019, political campaigns will start using social media with certain digital strategies. For this reason, at this stage, the results and discussion focus more on the role of social media in 2019 as a tool to facilitate the campaign strategy than 2014 because in 2014 the campaign strategy by politicians is still focused on using mainstream media such as television and newspapers. Third, in 2019, candidates have focused on conducting digital campaigns through social media and creating some creative content to attract the attention of voters. Some content has become viral in the general public especially lately voters. However, viral content on social media does not guarantee to win the 2019 election. Supported by the fact that, viral content by the opposition still does not win the 2019 election.

The fourth finding is that creative and neat content created by incumbents tends to be more active on social media. This is evidenced by incumbent more frequent posting on social media Facebook and Twitter compared to the opposition who are less active in making posts and creative content. For this reason, it is natural to look at the analysis of social media content data if the incumbent succeeds in attracting the attention of voters, especially those active on social media. Supported by the fact that incumbent won the election for the second time.

In general, from the research above, it has answered research questions about what is the role of social media in the 2014 and 2019 elections and how candidates use social media in political strategies. Likewise with the hypothesis that has been made. In the first hypothesis, it has been answered through the results of data collection from expert interviews that the role of social media is greater in the 2019 election compared to the 2014 election. The data is shown by the results of the participants' answers. Otherwise, the second hypothesis is also answered through the results of depth interviews and analysis of social media data. Through the analysis of interview data, it was emphasized that social media facilitated digital campaigns by candidates in the 2019 election, while the 2014 election political strategy was still won by the mainstream media. This is supported by the increasing use of social media which is getting bigger every year. Also, in 2019, candidates have established using social media by creating special content to attract voters' attention. The hypothesis of this section is also supported by analysis of data from Facebook and Twitter social media content which shows that each post of detention is much more active than the opposition in utilizing social media.

Through the four contents of social media data analysis, it cannot be denied that Joko Widodo as the incumbent is indeed superior in terms of social programs and activities. As an active president, it seems easier to attract the attention of voters. Moreover, this is supported by approaching the 2019 election, incumbent issuing special programs such as development progress in Indonesia and special programs for the lower middle class. As for the opposition, the strategy is only in the form of interaction with supporters on social media and conducting visits to disadvantaged areas to attract voters' attention.



4.2 Limitation and further research

The limitation of this study is only focus on the different roles of social media in the 2014 and 2019 presidential elections in Indonesia. The main focus is from the parameters that have been determined from the beginning, the political strategy through political campaigns which are then in line with research is the digital campaign in the election. The suggestion for further research is the release of alternative analysis available on social media and political preferences in elections. It is believed that social media has a significant influence on political preferences, especially in democracies. Not only that, several factors that influence the relationship between social media and elections are also worth considering. This is because these factors can come from outside as well as from within the country itself along with the passage of elections such as domestic policies and influences from outside the country. For this reason, it seems important to research more about the factors that influence the role of social media in the election.

However, this research was carried out in limited time and space. Limitations of time and other resources certainly deserve to be considered for future research. For this reason, for better research, the validity of the data is recommended to take a larger sample as a form of implication from research with further discussion. Larger surveys in the form of presenting qualitative and quantitative data must be considered. The presentation of social media data through social networks analysis must also be highly considered for future research.

4.3 Research implications

It has been realized that an understanding of the role of social media in elections will become more relevant in 2019. However, there is limited research in presenting an explanation of the role of social media in the presidential election in Indonesia. Therefore, the 2014 and 2019 presidential elections became my consideration for studying the context of elections in the space of political strategies in the form of digital campaigns through social media. However, consideration of the existence of a campaign through the mainstream media is also still presented in the 2014 election.

As reported above, the role of social media is greater in the 2019 election compared to 2014. Two social media platforms also play an important role in the political campaign in 2019. Furthermore, an understanding of the provision of information on social media needs to be considered for politicians, especially presidential candidates during the campaign periods.

However, this study highly recommend to note that all political players must be more careful in using social media to avoid false news. Considering that the greater the social media, the greater the possibility of negative information that tends to be a hoax. For this reason, as politicians and public figures, one must certainly consider this possibility. In addition, at the election stage, politicians must focus more on campaign strategies, deregulate campaign rules and focus on positive campaigns. Because seeing the rise of black campaigns made by supporters, especially in the digital era.

Finally, evidence from this research shows that content on social media is a form of the political strategy by candidates. Furthermore, candidates must be very careful in conveying political ideas to interact with voters through social media. With the aim, the ideas made are conveyed clearly to the community.



Acknowledgements

I would like thank to my supervisor, the interview participants, consultant, and reviewers, for their useful comments and answers.

Notes

¹ We are social is a global conversation agency, provides social media marketing and communications services to organizations in the United Kingdom and internationally. In this case, We Are Social made a research a about total population in Indonesia, https://wearesocial.com

² Letters of General Election Commissions of Republic Indonesia is a officials letter from the Indonesian general election commission (KPU) stating the final results of the presidential election polls in 2014 and 2019, https://www.kpu.go.id

³ Joko Widodo as the incumbent served twice as President of the Republic of Indonesia. While Prabowo Subianto still as the opposition for the same time in the election.

⁴ For Joko Widodo's Twitter account, https://twitter.com/jokowi

⁵ For Prabowo Subianto's Twitter account, https://twitter.com/prabowo

⁶ For Joko Widodo's Facebook account, https://www.facebook.com/Jokowi/

⁷ For Prabowo Subianto's Facebook account,

https://www.facebook.com/PrabowoSubianto/



Bibliography

Alshenqeeti, H. (2014). Interviewing as a data collection method: A critical review. English linguistics research, 3(1), 39-45.

Amedie, Jacob (2015), “The Impact of Social Media on Society”. Advanced Writing: Pop Culture Intersections.

Badri, Muhammad (2011), “Komunikasi Pemasaran UMKM Di Era Media Sosial, Corporate and Marketing Communication”, Jakarta: Pusat Studi Komunikasi dan Bisnis Program Pasca Sarjana Universitas Mercu Buana.

Barbour, R. S., & Schostak, J. (2005). Interviewing and focus groups. Research methods in the social sciences, 1, 41-48.

Berliani Ardha (2014), “Media as a Campaign for 2014 Political Parties in Indonesia”, Journal of Communication Vision Volume 13, No. 01.

Bennett, W.L. & Iyengar, S. (2008), “A New Era of Minimal Effects? The Changing Foundations of Political Communication”, Journal of Communication.

Biswas Aindrila, Nikhil and Mousumi Roy (2014), “Influence of Social Media on Voting Behavior”, Journal of Power, Politics & Governance, Vol. 2, No. 2.

Brogan Chris (2010), “Social Media 101 Tactic and Tips to Develop Your Business Online”, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Chadwick, A. (2013), “Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power” New York: Oxford University Press.

Challenges Daniela V. Dimitrova1 and Jцrg Matthes (2018), “Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological”, Journalism Publication, Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication.

Chris Brogan (2010), “Social Media 101 Tactic and Tips to Develop Your Business Online”, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research designs: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.

Dahlgren, P. (2013), “The Political Web: Media, Participation and Alternative Democracy”, Palgrave Macmillan.

Dailey, Patrick R. (2009), “Social Media: Finding Its Way into Your Businnes Strategy and Culture”, Burlington, Linkage.

Delli Carpini et all (2004), “Public Deliberation, Discursive Participation, and Citizen Engagement: A Review of the Empirical Literature”, Annual Review of Political Science.

Dewenter Ralf (2018), et all, “Can Media Drive the Electorate? The Impact of Media Coverage on Party Affiliation and Voting Intentio ns”, Dusseldorf Institute for Competition Economics, No. 278.

Dixion J. Dr. Brian (2012), “Social Media for School Leader”, United States: Jossey Bass a Willey Inprint.

Effing, R., Van Hillegersberg, J., & Huibers, T. (2011, August). Social media and political participation: are Facebook, Twitter and YouTube democratizing our political systems?. In International conference on electronic participation (pp. 25-35). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

El-Ansary, A. I. (2005). Relationship marketing management: a school in the history of marketing thought. Journal of Relationship Marketing, 4(1-2), 43-56.

Gaughan, A. J. (2016). Illiberal democracy: The toxic mix of fake news, hyperpolarization, and partisan election administration. Duke J. Const. L. & Pub. Pol'y, 12, 57.

Gerber, Alan S., et all (2007), "Does the Media Matter? A Field Experiment Measuring the Effect of Newspapers on Voting Behavior and Political Opinions”. Yield University.

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.

Johansson Anders C (2016), “Sosial Media and Politics in Indonesia”, Stockholm School of Economics Asia Working Paper, No. 42.

Kaplan Andreas and Michael Haenlien (2012), “Social Media: Back to The Roots and Back to the future”, Journal of Systems and Information Technology Vol. 14 No. 2, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Karlsen, R., & Enjolras, B. (2016). Styles of social media campaigning and influence in a hybrid political communication system: Linking candidate survey data with Twitter data. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(3), 338-357.

Kazi Rezuan Hossain. Md. et all (2017), “People's Voting Behaviour in Local Election: A Study on Annadanagar Union Parishad, Pirgachha, Rangpur”, IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), Vol. 22, Issue 3, Ver. 1.

Kenneth Newton and Jan W. Van Deth. (2010), Foundation of Comparative Politics: Cambride University Press.

Knoll, J., Matthes, J., & Heiss, R. (2020). The social media political participation model: A goal systems theory perspective. Convergence, 26(1), 135-156.

Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., Brady, M., Goodman, M., & Hansen, T. (2019). Marketing management. Pearson UK.

Matthes, J., Knoll, J., & von Sikorski, C. (2018). The “spiral of silence” revisited: A meta-analysis on the relationship between perceptions of opinion support and political opinion expression. Communication Research, 45(1), 3-33.

Mayfield, A. (2008). What is social media.

McLellan, E., MacQueen, K. M., & Neidig, J. L. (2003). Beyond the qualitative interview: Data preparation and transcription. Field methods, 15(1), 63-84.

Pap Ana et all (2018), “Does Social Media Usage Influence Youth's Interest in politics”, International Journal Multidisciplinary Business and Science, Vo. 4, No.5.

Phalen, P. F. (2012). Book Review: Bruce A. Williams and Michael X. Delli Carpini After Broadcast News: Media Regimes, Democracy and the New Information Environment.

Prior, M. (2007). Post-Broadcast Democracy. How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Riezebos, P., de Vries, S. A., de Vries, P. W., & de Zeeuw, E. (2011, July). The effects of social media on political party perception and voting behavior. In Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference ICT, Society and Human Beings 2011, Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference e-Democracy, Equity and Social Justice.

Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2012, January). Political communication and influence through microblogging--An empirical analysis of sentiment in Twitter messages and retweet behavior. In 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3500-3509). IEEE.

Woolley, J. K., Limperos, A. M., & Oliver, M. B. (2010). The 2008 presidential election, 2.0: A content analysis of user-generated political Facebook groups. Mass Communication and Society, 13(5), 631-652.



Appendix A: Interview guidelines

I am Sellita, a Master's student of “Politics. Economics. Philosophy” at the National Research University - Higher School of Economics, Moscow - Russia. I am conducting a scientific study on social media and election in Indonesia. The main goal of this study is to make descriptive explanation about the differences between two Presidential elections in 2014 and 2019. After I made careful search for experts that will be relevant for this study, your name and area of specialization became one of the most relevant for the success of this research. As an expert of this area, I kindly invite you to participate this interview approximately 30 minutes. All information given for this scientific study shall be recorded and transcribed which will be used solely for academic purposes and will be treated with absolute confidentiality. The findings of this research will be reported in aggregate form and made available to the general public through a publication. The question included are:

1. How long have you been observing social media in Indonesia?

2. How long have you been observing election in Indonesia?

3. Based on your experiences in Indonesia's election 2014, what do you think matters for candidate to win an election?

4. Based on your experiences in Indonesia's election 2019, what do you think matters for candidate to win an election?

5. Do you think domestic policies matters in the 2014 presidential election?

6. Do you think domestic policies matters in the 2019 presidential election?

7. In what ways does social media influence or not influence Indonesia's 2014 election?

8. In what ways does social media influence or not influence Indonesia's 2019 election?

9. Do you think some voters might have shifted their support and if this was as a result of certain politicians defecting or perhaps minor parties joining one of the main parties?

10. What recommendation do you have for incumbent governments and oppositions to take related to social media era in election?

Appendix B: Social characteristics of informants

Informants, profession, age

CODE Profession Age

A Ministry Executive, Kominfo 33

B Journalist, Jawa Post 33

C Institution Executive, Bawaslu 38

D Journalist, Kompas 35

E Observer, Senior Lecturer 38

F Teaching, Senior Lecturer 50

G Journalist, Kompas 35

H Institution Executive, Head of Bawaslu 38

I Media Executive, Media Indonesia 50

J Ministry Executive, Kominfo 35

Mean= 83.25

Standard Deviation= 5.175

Source: Field data, 2020



Appendix C: Brief definition and description

Election: Election is a formal group decision-making process whereby a population chooses someone public office which is carried out directly, publicly, freely, confidentially, honestly, and fairly in a democratic country.

Presidential election: is a formal group decision-making process whereby a population elects someone to hold the position of president in a democratic country.

Social network: is a form of social relationships built by people to communicate with other people who have similar interests, activities, backgrounds, or real life connections.

Social media: is an online platform used to build social networks or social relationships with others that makes it easy for people to share information quickly.

Political strategies: Art in politics / is a form of long-term plan followed by actions to achieve political goals.

Political campaign: form of political strategy used to attract the attention of voters during the election.

Polarization: Polarization is the political distance separating participants. In this study, polarization refers to the distance between two camps of each candidate.

Voters: Voters refer to participants in the general election.

Mainstream media: is a term to refer to a large number of mass media news such as television, newspapers, newspapers, magazines and so on that can affect existing thoughts.

New media: is a term to refer to a number of new media platforms incorporated into a social network in the form of social media through an internet connection.

Coattail effect: referring to the party supporting the presidential candidate will get an additional vote from the voter candidates.



Appendix D: Transcriptions of expert's interview

Table showing the transcriptions of expert's interview

Lead question	Informant	Information
What do you think matters for candidate to win an election?	A	In 2014: a combination of party machines, volunteers and charismatic leadership. In 2019: the use of identity politics supported by the internet.
	B	In 2014: what matters for the presidential election was establishing followers. In 2019: what matters for election in 2019 was maintaining the followers.
	C	In 2014: charismatic leadership was a matter to win the election. In 2019: the use of identity politics.
	D	In 2014: Public engagement/campaign through various media, from conventional to new media. In 2019: Public trust and negative campaign.
	E	In 2014: served for the candidates who have the support by the mainstream media. In 2019: how to get new voters through social media.
	F	In 2014: the popularity of candidates. In 2019: political communication to get volunteers through the election.
	G	In 2014: There are 3 things for candidates to win the election: program, personal, emotional, or primordial factor. In 2019: still the same as election in 2014
	H	In 2014: charismatic leadership and popularity of the candidates In 2019: maintaining of social media to get the followers
	I	In 2014: supported by mainstream media. In 2019: supported by new media.
	J	In 2014: establishing followers through mainstream media. In 2019: maintaining followers through new media.
Do you think domestic policies matters in the presidential election? In what ways does social media influence or not influence the election? Do you think some voters might have shifted their support and if this was as a result of certain politicians defecting or perhaps minor parties joining one of the main parties?	A	In 2014: no, charismatic leadership still becomes the first factor. In 2019: yes, because the incumbent already had a good track record for the last five years.
	B	In 2014: not sure. In 2019: yes, people were expected to have an impact from coattail effects.
	C	In 2014: no, charismatic leadership of the incumbent. In 2019: yes, domestic policies in 2019 determine political preferences.
	D	In 2014: yes, but figures of the candidates still attract voters more. In 2019: yes, The incumbent showed the right track to bring Indonesia to better infrastructure and investment development.
	E	In 2014: no, domestic policies do not have too much influence on the presidential election. In 2019: yes, domestic policies determine the outcome of the presidential election.
	F	In 2014: no, black campaign through the media still exist in the presidential election in 2014. In 2019: yes, one of the most important and influential domestic policies was the parliamentary threshold and presidential threshold.
	G	In 2014: no, policies are in term of regulation, it didn't matters. In 2019: no, domestic policies were not important during the elections.
	H	In 2014: no, the leadership factor is still a reference in 2014. In 2019: yes, people began to see the policies that have been realized by the incumbent.
	I	In 2014: yes, domestic policy is supported by the government so that people also pay attention to existing policies to make choices. In 2019: yes, domestic policies still influence people's political preferences in 2019
	J	In 2014: no, domestic policies do not affect the presidential election because the issues in the media are more considered by voters. In 2019: yes, the policies made by the incumbent as a superior program to attract the attention of voters.
	A	In 2014: social media used to deliver narratives from candidates to convey their ideologies. In 2019: Internet penetration in 2019 is getting higher. Social Media as a tool to convey the narrative desired by candidates, it can be a matter of politics or creating an image.

Подобные документы

• Presidential еlections in the USA

  Presidential candidates. Learning the information of the Electoral College, to understanding the process by which the President is officially elected. The formal ceremony of presidential inauguration, including the information about its time, place.
  
  курсовая работа [34,7 K], добавлен 09.04.2011
  

• To what extent Rousseau’s Social Contract Theory is valid nowadays? Modern Political Theory

  Analysis of Rousseau's social contract theory and examples of its connection with the real world. Structure of society. Principles of having an efficient governmental system. Theory of separation of powers. The importance of censorship and religion.
  
  статья [13,1 K], добавлен 30.11.2014
  

• Comparison of the policy of the two presidents

  Barack Hussein Obama and Dmitry Medvedev: childhood years and family, work in politics before the presidential election and political views, the election, the campaign and presidency. The role, significance of these presidents of their countries history.
  
  курсовая работа [62,3 K], добавлен 02.12.2015
  

• Electorate influence on political and social environment: referendums

  Referendum - a popular vote in any country of the world, which resolved important matters of public life. Usually in a referendum submitted questions, the answers to which are the words "yes" or "no". Especially, forms, procedure of referendums.
  
  презентация [1,2 M], добавлен 25.11.2014
  

• The political system of society

  The term "political system". The theory of social system. Classification of social system. Organizational and institutional subsystem. Sociology of political systems. The creators of the theory of political systems. Cultural and ideological subsystem.
  
  реферат [18,8 K], добавлен 29.04.2016
  

• The political System of the United States

  Basis of government and law in the United States of America. The Bill of Rights. The American system of Government. Legislative branch, executive branch, judicial branch. Political Parties and Elections. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of the press.
  
  презентация [5,5 M], добавлен 21.11.2012
  

• Of the Polish political parties and organizations in Vilnius (1919 - 1922 gg.)

  Leading role Society Gard Kresevo (USC) in organizing social and political life of the Poland. The Polish People's Movement of Vilna Earth. The influence of the Polish Central Electoral Committee. The merger of the TNG "Emancipation" and PNC "Revival".
  
  реферат [18,3 K], добавлен 02.10.2009
  

• Democracy as a form of government

  The definition of democracy as an ideal model of social structure. Definition of common features of modern democracy as a constitutional order and political regime of the system. Characterization of direct, plebiscite and representative democracy species.
  
  презентация [1,8 M], добавлен 02.05.2014
  

• Political party system

  Study of legal nature of the two-party system of Great Britain. Description of political activity of conservative party of England. Setting of social and economic policies of political parties. Value of party constitution and activity of labour party.
  
  курсовая работа [136,8 K], добавлен 01.06.2014
  

• Civil society

  Functions of democracy as forms of political organization. Its differences from dictatorship and stages of historical development. Signs and methods of stabilizing of civil society. Essence of social order and duty, examples of public establishments.
  
  контрольная работа [24,4 K], добавлен 11.08.2011
  

• главная
• рубрики
• по алфавиту
• вернуться в начало страницы
• вернуться к началу текста
• вернуться к подобным работам