Informasi Banjir di Aceh Tamiang: Citizen–Generated Content Versus Klarifikasi Pemerintah
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Article Summary
This study aims to analyze the framing of the government and citizen-generated content on flood information in Aceh Tamiang and compare the construction of meaning, responsibility, and handling recommendations built by the two actors in the digital communication space. The method used is qualitative research with Robert Entman's framing analysis design, using data in the form of TikTok content consisting of official government clarifications and public content in the November-December 2025 period, which is collected through non-participatory observation and documentation, then categorized based on the function of problem definition, causal diagnosis, moral assessment, and solution recommendations. The results show that government framing tends to emphasize stability, perception control, and institutional legitimacy by reducing crises as controlled situations, while citizen-generated content displays the reality of humanitarian crises, inequality of handling, delayed responses, and social and ecological damage as the center of meaning, thus forming a strong counter-narrative in the digital public space. The comparison of the two framing shows the battle of meaning between the narrative of state stability and the direct experiences of survivors that affect audience reception and public trust. This study recommends the repositioning of government disaster communication towards a more transparent, empathetic, and participatory approach, strengthening risk communication based on field experience by disaster management agencies, and the development of advanced research that integrates framing analysis with audience reception studies and digital platform dynamics.
Keywords
Article Keywords
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
License: All articles are licensed under 
Bhandari, C., Scolobig, A., Abderhalden, J., Weyrich, P., & Stoffel, M. (2025). Risk communication policies and strategies in Nepal and Switzerland: A comparative study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 129, 105773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105773.
Bojčić, K., & Spasenovski, N. (2025). Media studies. In Reference Module in Social Sciences. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-26629-4.00007-1.
Cavdar, D., Tepe, B., Saribay, S. A., & Yilmaz, O. (2025). Moral framing effects on environmental attitudes: A conceptual replication and extension of Feinberg and Willer (2013). Journal of Environmental Psychology, 108, 102827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102827.
Dallo, I., Marti, M., Fallou, L., & Haslinger, F. (2024). Risk communication in a rapidly evolving environment: The ethical and societal challenges. In Geoethics for the Future: Facing Global Challenges (pp. 321–330). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-15654-0.00028-1.
Dechamps, S., Simonofski, A., & Burnay, C. (2025). Citizen-centricity in digital government: A theoretical and empirical typology. Government Information Quarterly, 42(1), 102005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.102005.
Dresser, C., Storr, L., & Leaning, J. (2025). Disasters and emergency planning. In International Encyclopedia of Public Health (3rd ed., Vol. 5, pp. 759–772). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-99967-0.00151-4.
Hansson, S. (2024). Coercive impoliteness and blame avoidance in government communication. Discourse, Context & Media, 58, 100770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2024.100770.
Jiang, S., Kinney, M., & Yost, C. (2024). Architecture matters: Exploring audiences’ holistic theatrical experience through social media reviews. Arts and the Market, 14(2–3), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAM-09-2023-0065.
Lee, H., & Alhabash, S. (2025). The role of social media influencers in nation branding and relationship building with foreign audiences. Public Relations Review, 51(2), 102570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2025.102570.
Mota, E. C., & Klein, P. G. (2025). Extrusive effects of digital government: Reframing the citizen–state relationship. Government Information Quarterly, 42(3), 102064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102064.
Omondi, G. (2024). Visual framing during crisis: A 10-year systematic review. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 30(1), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-04-2024-0065.
Pande, S., Scolobig, A., Adamowski, J. F., et al. (2026). Framing, analysis, and modeling. In Coevolution and prediction of coupled human-water systems (pp. 97–137). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-41736-8.00012-9.
Schwarz, A., Sellnow, D. D., Diers-Lawson, A., & Sellnow, T. L. (2025). The crisis response to the Türkiye-Syria earthquakes in 2023. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 129, 105770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105770.
Smith, D. L. (2025). Social media and LIS: Current trends in research. In Encyclopedia of Libraries, Librarianship, and Information Science (Vol. 3, pp. 647–655). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95689-5.00173-5.
Tam, K.-P., & Chan, H.-W. (2025). Perception of global norm of government climate action and support for domestic climate policies. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 106, 102694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2025.102694.
Vahle, J. L., Bhat, V., & Wood, C. E. (2023). Risk management and communication: Building trust and credibility with the public. In Haschek and Rousseaux’s Handbook of Toxicologic Pathology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 629–656). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821047-5.00022-1.
Wang, L., & Jiang, S. (2025). Government risk communication and response networks. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 126, 105587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105587.
Wang, L., Zhao, N., & Liu, D. (2020). Complex disaster management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 266, 122091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122091.
Waszak, P., Łuszczak, E., & Zagożdżon, P. (2024). COVID-19 in Polish-language social media. Health Policy and Technology, 13(2), 100871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2024.100871.
Xie, H., Bao, C., Du, Y., Fan, X., & Meng, Q. (2026). Identifying the trustworthy government for the media. Expert Systems with Applications, 296, 129211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.129211.
Yeh, A. (2025). When speaking out goes too far: Framing Taiwan’s #MeToo. Women’s Studies International Forum, 113, 103190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2025.103190.