Social Media and Poverty: Paradoxes of Communicating Poverty Issues on Social Media

R. Wahyunengseh, S. Hastjarjo, D. Suharto
{"title":"Social Media and Poverty: Paradoxes of Communicating Poverty Issues on Social Media","authors":"R. Wahyunengseh, S. Hastjarjo, D. Suharto","doi":"10.20476/JBB.V25I3.10049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the democratic theory perspective, social media is a means to improve collaborative public governance between government, society, and business sector, in order to ensure effective public issues management as well as public services. On the other hand, there are preconditions for the effective use of media social; in the context of addressing poverty issues, these preconditions have potential to generate certain paradoxes. This article aims to answer a question “Is the use of social media effective to the poverty alleviation mainstreaming issue?” This study was conducted in one of the cities that won Smart City Award in Indonesia; using content analysis on the \"Monggo Lapor\" Facebook group combined with the mapping of Local Government Apparatus and poor people group’s perception on the use of social media for poverty issue through focus group discussion. The data then was analyzed using Institutional Theory approaches to identify the paradoxes that emerge from the using of social media in process of communication addressing poverty issues. The result shows that poverty issues were marginalized in the discussion using Facebook group, because of the culture of the bureaucracy in the local government and the culture of the society. The paradoxes arising were, i) democratic-elitist; ii) functional-artificial ones. The emerging paradoxes resulted from the inconsistency of the Local Government in implementing e-government for addressing poverty issues and the elitism in using the social media as a tool for power control by society. Social Media “Monggo Lapor” has not functioned intensively as the means of expressing voice and communicating between people and government for poverty issue, but it had functioned intensively for non-poverty issues, so that non-poor group enjoy its usefulness more. It indicated that the group with excess power had a higher ability of using social media. This paper recommends further research focusing on building social media readiness model, particularly for developing an inclusive regulation for poverty alleviation.","PeriodicalId":8986,"journal":{"name":"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20476/JBB.V25I3.10049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

From the democratic theory perspective, social media is a means to improve collaborative public governance between government, society, and business sector, in order to ensure effective public issues management as well as public services. On the other hand, there are preconditions for the effective use of media social; in the context of addressing poverty issues, these preconditions have potential to generate certain paradoxes. This article aims to answer a question “Is the use of social media effective to the poverty alleviation mainstreaming issue?” This study was conducted in one of the cities that won Smart City Award in Indonesia; using content analysis on the "Monggo Lapor" Facebook group combined with the mapping of Local Government Apparatus and poor people group’s perception on the use of social media for poverty issue through focus group discussion. The data then was analyzed using Institutional Theory approaches to identify the paradoxes that emerge from the using of social media in process of communication addressing poverty issues. The result shows that poverty issues were marginalized in the discussion using Facebook group, because of the culture of the bureaucracy in the local government and the culture of the society. The paradoxes arising were, i) democratic-elitist; ii) functional-artificial ones. The emerging paradoxes resulted from the inconsistency of the Local Government in implementing e-government for addressing poverty issues and the elitism in using the social media as a tool for power control by society. Social Media “Monggo Lapor” has not functioned intensively as the means of expressing voice and communicating between people and government for poverty issue, but it had functioned intensively for non-poverty issues, so that non-poor group enjoy its usefulness more. It indicated that the group with excess power had a higher ability of using social media. This paper recommends further research focusing on building social media readiness model, particularly for developing an inclusive regulation for poverty alleviation.
社交媒体与贫困:在社交媒体上传播贫困问题的悖论
从民主理论的角度来看,社交媒体是一种改善政府、社会和商业部门之间协同公共治理的手段,以确保有效的公共问题管理和公共服务。另一方面,有效利用媒体社交是有前提条件的;在处理贫穷问题方面,这些先决条件有可能产生某些矛盾。本文旨在回答一个问题:“利用社交媒体对扶贫主流化问题有效吗?”这项研究是在印度尼西亚获得智慧城市奖的城市之一进行的;通过焦点小组讨论,对“Monggo Lapor”Facebook群组进行内容分析,并结合当地政府机构和贫困人群对使用社交媒体解决贫困问题的看法。然后使用制度理论方法对数据进行分析,以确定在解决贫困问题的沟通过程中使用社交媒体所出现的悖论。结果表明,由于当地政府官僚文化和社会文化的影响,贫困问题在Facebook群组的讨论中被边缘化。由此产生的矛盾是:1)民主精英主义;Ii)功能性人造的。地方政府在实施电子政务解决贫困问题上的不一致性,以及精英主义在利用社交媒体作为社会控制权力的工具上的不一致性,导致了这些悖论的出现。社交媒体“Monggo Lapor”在贫困问题上并没有集中作为人民与政府之间表达声音和沟通的手段,但它在非贫困问题上发挥了集中的作用,使非贫困群体更多地享受到它的有用性。这表明,拥有过多权力的群体使用社交媒体的能力更高。本文建议进一步研究侧重于建立社会媒体准备模型,特别是制定包容性扶贫法规。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信