Publication Search

This study examines the dynamics of public criticism of Shin Tae-yong's dismissal by PSSI as a phenomenon of digital communication that shows the tension between freedom of expression and the legal limits of hate speech. The background of this research stems from the intensity of netizens' reactions, which developed into collective moral pressure and had the potential to enter the realm of insults and hostility, as reflected in various comments, news reports, and verbal disputes involving public figures. This study aims to analyze how criticism, media framing, and netizen responses interact with the regulations of the ITE Law, particularly Article 28 paragraph (2), which is often used in reporting hate speech. The methods used are a normative juridical approach and case studies with document analysis, news reports, and academic literature techniques to identify patterns of digital expression and their legal relevance. The results of the study show that public criticism of Shin Tae-yong not only reflects performance evaluation, but also contains emotional, social identity, and moral dimensions that are reinforced by media framing and digital culture. The discussion confirms that the shift from criticism to hate speech occurs when public expression is not managed ethically, while law enforcement on hate speech articles still faces interpretation problems. In conclusion, this verbal dispute reflects the complexity of Indonesia's digital democracy and the urgency of legal reform

This study critically examines the construction and reproduction of authenticity norms and buffer standards in Indonesian TikTok users’ communication practices. Employing Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework, the research explores how digital expressions—through captions, comments, and hashtags—reflect power relations, algorithmic logic, and social norms that operate subtly yet effectively. An analysis of five popular TikTok contents reveals that so-called “authentic” expression is not spontaneous honesty but rather a curated and performative construct aligned with algorithmic expectations and community aesthetics. The concept of the buffer standard refers to implicit symbolic boundaries that define which expressions are “acceptable” and which risk social or systemic rejection. The study concludes that freedom of expression in digital spaces like TikTok is always a product of negotiation between user agency, algorithmic pressure, cultural norms, and the commodification of identity.  

This study aims to see the determination of the minimum limit of criminal liability for children in conflict with the law after the emergence of the rape and murder case of a junior high school student in Palembang in August 2024 where the three perpetrators who were under 14 (fourteen) years old were not sentenced but only in the form of actions. This research is a normative legal research that uses a statutory approach and a case approach. The results of this study indicate that when referring to the provisions of international law on children, namely the CRC and its General Comments and the Beijing Rules, the determination of the minimum age of criminal liability for children and the minimum age of children can be punished in national law, namely the SPPA, is appropriate so that there is no need for changes. There are three solutions to dealing with cases of children committing sexual violence in the future that the government can do, namely: Strengthening parental responsibility in supervising digital literacy and strengthening family socio-economics, psychological approaches to children and the importance of sex education