A critical discourse analysis on Jokowi and Prabowo’s tweets during 2019 presidential election

(1) * Dwi Santoso Mail (Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Indonesia)
(2) Anggita Dyah Kusuma Wardani Mail (Universitas Ahamad Dahlan, Indonesia)
*corresponding author


This paper aims to present critical discourse analysis on Jokowi and Prabowo's tweets during the 2019 presidential election. This paper will focus on critical discourse analysis, especially on the discourse structure of Jokowi and Prabowo's tweets and the communication strategies used by Jokowi and Prabowo during the presidential election. This research uses qualitative methods. The data obtained by the researcher comes from tweets written by Jokowi and Prabowo during the 2019 presidential election campaign. The data collection method used is the observation method by observing Jokowi and Prabowo's Twitter accounts. After collecting the data, the researcher classified the discourse structure using Van Dijk's discourse analysis concept in Jokowi and Prabowo's Tweets. The results of this study found elements of macrostructure (theme), superstructure (scheme), and microstructure consisting of semantic elements (background, detail, intention, presupposition), syntax (sentence form, coherence, conditional coherence, distinguish coherence, disavowal, pronoun), stylistic elements (lexicon) and rhetorical elements (graphology and metaphor) in tweets written by Jokowi and Prabowo. Furthermore, Jokowi and Prabowo used strategic communication campaign stage 3, "Pramodel," during the presidential election. Joko Widodo used photos and videos of his story; meanwhile, Prabowo Subianto had much interaction with his Twitter followers.


Critical Discourse Analysis; Discourse Structure; Communication Strategies; Jokowi and Prabowo; Twitter




Article metrics

10.31763/ijcs.v3i2.379 Abstract views : 183 | PDF views : 49




Full Text



S. Apriyanto and A. Anum, “Personality of Politicians as the Object of Public Assessment,” 2020, doi: 10.4108/eai.20-9-2019.2290820.

S. Apriyanto and A. Nurhayaty, “Born In Social Media Culture: Personality Features Impact In Communication Context,” in icollit, 2019, pp. 167–175.

N. Ahmad and J. Siddique, “Personality Assessment using Twitter Tweets,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 112, pp. 1964–1973, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.08.067.

J. Pal and A. Gonawela, “Studying political communication on Twitter: the case for small data,” Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci., vol. 18, pp. 97–102, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.09.009.

N. de F. Olivarius, M. B. Kousgaard, S. Reventlow, D. G. Quelle, and C. Tulinius, “Dynamic Strategic Planning in a Professional Knowledge-Based Organization,” J. Res. Adm., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 35–48, 2010.

P. K. Blind, “Building Trust in Government in the Twenty-first Century: Review of Literature and Emerging Issues,” 7th Glob. Forum Reinventing Gov., no. June, pp. 1–31, 2007.

J. F. Chisholm, “Review of the status of cyberbullying and cyberbullying prevention,” J. Inf. Syst. Educ., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 77–87, 2014.

K. Kredens, “On the Status of Linguistic Evidence in Litigation,” Nowak, P., Nowakowski, P. (Eds.). (2006). Lang. Commun. Information. Pozn. Sorus Publ., pp. 23–30, 2006.

L. Lazar, “Media as a Mediator of Intercultural Communication in the Age of Globalization,” Int. J. Commun. Res., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 291–294, 2012.

I. Holloway and S. Wheeler, Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare, Third Edit. United Kingdom: Willey-Blackwell, 2010.

J. P. Gee, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, Hbk. New York: Routledge, 2001.

M. Bohn and M. C. Frank, “The pervasive role of pragmatics in early language Manuel,” United States, 2020.

O. Mesly, Creating Models in Psychological Research. New York: Springer, 2015.

T. A. Van Dijk, “Acceptability in context,” Accept. Lang., pp. 39–61, 2015, doi: 10.1515/9783110806656-005.

T. A. van Dijk, “Aims of Critical Discourse Analysis,” Japenese Discourse, vol. 1, no. 1. pp. 17–27, 1995, doi: 10.1177/0957926593004002006.

T. A. van Dijk, “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis,” Discourse Soc., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 249–283, 1993, doi: 10.1177/0957926593004002006.

D. Santoso and S. Apriyanto, “Pragmatics implicature analysis of police interrogation: Forensic linguistics analysis,” Int. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil., vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 115–124, 2020, doi: 10.37200/IJPR/V24I6/PR260009.

L. Anthony, “Defining English for specific purposes and the role of the ESP practitioner,” Retrieved Novemb., vol. 18, p. 2008, 1997.

H. Tavakoli, A Dictionary of Research Methodology and Statistics in Applied Linguistics. Iran: Rahnama Press, 2012.

J. P. Gee and M. Handford, The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 2012.

H. El Saj, “Discourse Analysis: Personal Pronouns in Oprah Winfrey Hosting Queen Rania of Jordan,” Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit., vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 529–532, 2013, doi: 10.7763/IJSSH.2012.V2.163.

J. Cotteril, “Language in the Legal Process,” in Criminal justice, New York: PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2002.

A. Davies, “An introduction to applied linguistics. From practice to theory (2nd edition),” English Specif. Purp., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 363–367, 2008, doi: doi:10.1016/j.esp.2008.03.002.

R. Conley, Confronting the Death Penalty, Oxford Stu. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.

C. P. Dwyer, M. J. Hogan, and I. Stewart, “An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 12, pp. 43–52, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2013.12.004.

N. Fairclough, Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language. New York: Longman, 1995.

M. W. Nielsen, New and Persistent Gender Equality Challenges in Academia. 2015.

P. Anesa, “Courtroom Discourses: An Analysis of the Westerfield Jury Trial,” UNIVERSITA‘ DEGLI STUDI DI VERONA, 2013.

M. Jorgensen and L. J. Philips, Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method, 1st ed. United States: SAGE Publication, 2002.

S. Gunawan, “Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences Hillary Clinton ’ s presidential campaign rhetoric : Making America whole again,” Kasetsart J. Soc. Sci., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 50–55, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.kjss.2016.11.002.

R. Ulinnuha, W. Udasmoro, and Y. Wijaya, “Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method in Social and Literary Framework,” Indones. J. Appl. Linguist., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 262–274, 2013, doi: 10.17509/ijal.v2i2.170.

M. Galdia, Lectures on Legal Linguistics. New York: Peter Lang Edition, 2017.

L. M. Booker, “When Worldviews Collide: What Linguistic Style Matching and Distal Language Reveal about Deception in Political Discourse,” The University of Memphis, 2012.

T. J. J. Lears, “The Concept of Cultural Hegemony : Problems and Possibilities Author ( s ): T . J . Jackson Lears Source : The American Historical Review , Vol . 90 , No . 3 ( Jun ., 1985 ), pp . 567-593 Published by : Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Hi,” oxford Journals, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 567–593, 2016.

J. C. Magee and A. D. Galinsky, “The Academy of Management Annals Chapter 8: Social Hierarchy: The Self-Reinforcing Nature of Power and Status,” Acad. Manag. Ann., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 351–398, 2008, doi: 10.1080/19416520802211628.

R. D. Warastuti, “Gender Differences in Children Language,” Musawa, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 221–234, 2011.

J. R. Orozco-arroyave et al., “NeuroSpeech : An open-source software for Parkinson ’ s speech analysis,” Digit. Signal Process., vol. 1, pp. 1–15, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.dsp.2017.07.004.

M. Gerald R, Forensic Linguistics. New York: CRC Press, 2002.

N. Lisina, “Stylistic Features of Legal Discourse,” University of Oslo, 2013.

U. Flick, The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. United States: SAGE Publication, 2014.

M. Hartwig, Interrogating to detect deception and truth : Effects of strategic use of evidence. 2005.

C. Calhoun, “Communication as social science (and more),” Int. J. Commun., vol. 5, pp. 1479–1496, 2011.

D. O. Manz, Thomas W and Edgar, “Descriptive Study,” in Research Methods for Cyber Security, B. Romer, Ed. United States: Syngress, 2017, pp. 131–151.

Musliadi, “The Effectiveness of Describing Picture Activities in Improving Students’ Speaking Ability At Cokroaminoto University Palopo,” IDEAS J. English Lang. Teach. Learn. Linguist. Lit., vol. 4, no. 1, 2016, doi: 10.24256/ideas.v4i1.171.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Dwi Santoso

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

International Journal of Communication and Society  
ISSN 2684-9267
Published by Association for Scientic Computing Electronics and Engineering (ASCEE)
W : http://pubs2.ascee.org/index.php/ijcs
E : dani@ascee.org

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

View My Stats