Polarisasi Afektif dalam Percakapan Pemilihan Presiden 2024 di Platform X
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23917/komuniti.v18i2.18296Keywords:
Polarisasi Afektif, Pemilihan Presiden 2024, Platform X, Komunikasi Politik Digital, Netnografi, affective polarization, digital political communication; presidential election, reflexive thematic analysis, social media XAbstract
Pemilihan Presiden 2024 memperlihatkan menguatnya polarisasi afektif dalam percakapan politik digital, terutama pada platform X yang memungkinkan pengguna merespons isu elektoral secara cepat melalui reply dan quote tweet. Artikel ini menjelaskan bagaimana polarisasi afektif dimanifestasikan dalam percakapan publik X terkait Pemilihan Presiden 2024. Dengan berpijak pada Teori Identitas Sosial, penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif interpretif berorientasi netnografi dan Analisis Tematik Refleksif. Korpus penelitian terdiri atas 58 klaster percakapan publik yang mencakup unggahan pemantik, reply, dan quote tweet pada periode 28 November 2023 hingga 1 Januari 2025. Data dikurasi secara temporal, tematik, etik, dan deduplikatif, kemudian dianalisis melalui tahap familiarisasi, pengodean awal, pengembangan tema, peninjauan tema, dan interpretasi teoretis. Temuan menunjukkan empat pola utama polarisasi afektif, yaitu hierarkisasi kognitif partisan, purifikasi relasi privat, schadenfreude partisan terhadap tragedi kemanusiaan, dan delegitimasi simbolik terhadap institusi elektoral. Keempat pola tersebut memperlihatkan bahwa pilihan politik tidak hanya diperlakukan sebagai preferensi elektoral, tetapi juga sebagai dasar untuk menilai kecerdasan, moralitas, empati, dan kelayakan sosial seseorang. Artikel ini berargumen bahwa arsitektur interaksi X memperluas polarisasi afektif dari kompetisi elektoral menuju relasi sosial sehari-hari melalui praktik bahasa yang agresif, sarkastik, dan eksklusif.
The 2024 Indonesian presidential election revealed the intensification of affective polarization in digital political conversations, particularly on X, where replies and quote tweets enable users to respond rapidly to electoral issues. This article explains how affective polarization was manifested in public conversations on X related to the 2024 presidential election. Grounded in Social Identity Theory, this study employed an interpretive qualitative approach with a netnography orientation and Reflexive Thematic Analysis. Data were collected through non-participant observation using X Advanced Search, with electoral keywords and date-range operators, and were then selected purposively based on interaction intensity and thematic relevance. The research corpus consisted of 58 public conversational clusters, including initiating posts, replies, and quote tweets, collected from 28 November 2023 to 1 January 2025. The data were curated temporally, thematically, ethically, and through deduplication, then analyzed through familiarization, initial coding, theme development, theme review, and theoretical interpretation. The findings indicate four main patterns of affective polarization: partisan cognitive hierarchization, purification of private relationships, partisan schadenfreude toward human tragedy, and symbolic delegitimization of electoral institutions. These patterns show that political choice was treated not merely as an electoral preference but also as a basis for evaluating intelligence, morality, empathy, and social worthiness. The article argues that X’s interactional architecture extends affective polarization from electoral competition into everyday social relations through aggressive, sarcastic, and exclusionary language practices.
Downloads
References
Au, C. H., & Ho, K. K. W. (2022). Online schadenfreude as an outcome of ideological polarization: A case in Hong Kong. Online Information Review, 46(4), 678–697. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2021-0142
Bail, C. A. (2021). Breaking the social media prism: How to make our platforms less polarizing. Princeton University Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Byrne, D. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56, 1391–1412. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(9). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118
Eli J. Finkel et al. (2020). Political sectarianism in America. Science, 370, 533–536. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715
Forberg, P. L., & Schilt, K. (2023). What is ethnographic about digital ethnography? A sociological perspective. Frontiers in Sociology, 8(1156776). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1156776
Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., & Ess, C. M. (2020). Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0. Association of Internet Researchers. Retrieved from https://aoir.org/reports/ethics3.pdf
Grizzard, M., Frazer, R., & Monge, C. K. (2023). Demystifying schadenfreude: How disposition theorizing explains responses to social media stories of unvaccinated COVID-19 deaths. New Media & Society, 27(2), 1–24. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231184868
Gustin, F., Firmansyah, R., & Perdana, A. (2024). Echo chamber pada interaksi komentar di akun Instagram @turnbackhoaxid dalam konteks post-truth. Komuniti: Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Teknologi Informasi, 16(2), 262–283. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.23917/komuniti.v16i2.6375
Haryanti, Y. (2025). Multimodal analysis on the construction of identity and ideology in the X (Twitter) account @DokterTifa. Komuniti: Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Teknologi Informasi, 17(2), 309–332. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.23917/komuniti.v17i2.12273
Hidayat, N. (2025). Memimpin dengan narasi populis: Analisis peran dan tindak komunikasi publik Presiden Indonesia. Komuniti: Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Teknologi Informasi, 17(2), 231–251. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.23917/komuniti.v17i2.10213
Huber, G. A., & Malhotra, N. (2017). Political homophily in social relationships: Evidence from online dating behavior. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 269–283. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1086/687533
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review Political Science, 22, 129–146. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034
Khaq, I. S., & Wulandari, L. (2024). Framing and sentiment analysis of Gerindra Party political communication on Twitter (X) towards the 2024 elections. Jurnal Wacana Politik, 9(1), 1–10.
Kozinets, R. V. (2019). Netnography: The Essential Guide to Qualitative Social Media Research. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003001430-2
Lim, M. (2017). Freedom to hate: social media, algorithmic enclaves, and the rise of tribal nationalism in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 49(3), 411–427.
Lynch, M. P. (2018). Arrogance, truth and public discourse. Episteme, 15(3), 283–296. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2018.23
Martel, C., Mosleh, M., Yang, Q., Zaman, T., & Rand, D. G. (2024). Blocking counter-partisan accounts drives political assortment on Twitter. PNAS Nexus, 3(5). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae161
Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity. University of Chicago Press.
Norris, P. (2023). Cancel culture: Myth or reality? Political Studies, 71(1), 145–174. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00323217211037023
Porter, T., & Schumann, K. (2018). Intellectual humility and openness to the opposing view. Self and Identity, 17(2), 139–162. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2017.1361861
Saragih, R. P., Ramadhan, W., & Firliani, A. (2025). Dinamika labeling “Anak Abah” sebagai kritik pemerintah di era media sosial. . COMMTEMPORER: Jurnal Komunikasi Kontemporer, 2(1), 69–83.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 33–47.
Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barberá, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., … Nyhan, B. (n.d.). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3144139
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mas Mangaraja Muhamadin, Nayla Safitri, Nafisatul Khusniyah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
