Digital silence and civic trust: rethinking the Indonesian parliament’s online political communication on sexual violence

Amid a surge in gender-based violence, with over 25,000 cases reported by Komnas Perempuan in 2021, a 50 percent increase, and more than 15,000 incidents in 2024, the urgency for transparent and inclusive legislative communication in Indonesia has intensified. The Indonesian Parliament’s official website (DPR.go.id) plays a critical role in bridging the gap between lawmaking and public understanding, particularly regarding the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS). Using a qualitative based on interviews, field observations, and document analysis, this study investigates how the Indonesian Parliament’s (DPR) digital communication shapes civic engagement and institutional trust. Applying Ong’s framework of secondary orality, the study evaluates five communicative dimensions—interactivity, dialogic capacity, communal participation, simultaneity, and digitalization. Findings show that while the DPR.go.id provides digital tools, its lack of integration into a responsive framework results in digital silence, limiting meaningful public participation and fostering a trust deficit. The website functions more as a one-way broadcast than a space for reciprocal political communication. This study recommends enhancing feedback mechanisms, real-time engagement, and clearer access to improve public understanding and trust. The research contributes to digital political communication by offering a framework to assess digital platforms’ role in fostering inclusive civic engagement.

1 Introduction

In recent years, sexual violence in Indonesia has reached increasingly critical levels. Komnas Perempuan recorded more than 15,000 cases in 2024, the majority of which occurred in domestic settings (Openparlement.id, 2024). This crisis is further underscored by a sharp rise in femicide, from 237 cases in 2021 to 307 in 2022, with 159 incidents recorded in just the first 4 months of 2023 (Measures Equal 2030, 2024). In 2021, Komnas Perempuan also received over 25,000 reports of violence against women, with 33 % involving sexual violence (Wijoyo and Redi, 2021). The Montaigne Center further noted a 50 % year-on-year increase in reported gender-based violence, with most incidents occurring in domestic spaces (Montaigne Centre for Rule of Law and Administration of Justice, 2022).

This alarming trend prompted the ratification of the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS) in April 2022, following years of public advocacy. Although this law is designed to protect victims and prosecute offenders, its effectiveness depends not only on legal substance but also on public awareness and institutional communication. A national survey found that while 51 point 3 % of respondents had accessed the Indonesian Parliament’s (DPR) website, only 5 % found it very useful. In 2025, a major redesign further limited access to UU TPKS-related articles, diminishing transparency (Openparlement.id, 2024; Emedia DPR RI, 2025).

This situation raises a central concern about whether the DPR can fulfill its democratic mandate if its main digital platform fails to inform and engage the public. In the context of digital political communication, effective engagement involves not only the availability of information but also how content is structured, framed, and received. Though intended as a hub for legislative transparency and civic interaction, the Indonesian Parliament’s official website, which is DPR.go.id, often functions as a static repository instead of an active, dialogic medium.

The challenges faced by dpr.go.id are not exclusive to Indonesia. In many post-authoritarian societies and emerging democracies, institutional websites frequently fall short in enabling civic participation. These deficiencies reflect broader tensions in political communication between transparency and control, and between bureaucratic legacies and the demands of digital citizenship (Just and Latzer, 2017; Bertot et al., 2010). Legislative institutions today are expected to serve as communicative actors that foster public trust, beyond their role in formal lawmaking.

As a legislative body, the DPR is responsible not only for creating laws but also for establishing their public legitimacy through effective political communication. Scholars affirm that legislative transparency involves continuous two-way interaction with the public, not just the publication of documents (Hidayaturrahman et al., 2024). However, direct observation of the DPR website reveals persistent issues including irregular updates, complex navigation, and limited access to essential content such as hearing summaries. These challenges are particularly critical given that more than 90 % of sexual violence survivors do not report their cases due to fear and uncertainty (Change.org Indonesia, 2023).

Internal acknowledgment of these issues has also emerged. Legislators including Ledia Hanifa Amalia and Agung Budi Santoso have called for better transparency and richer content on the DPR website (Parlementaria, 2024). Despite the presence of E-Parliament features, public engagement remains low, leading citizens to depend on social media and third-party sources. This fragmented information landscape weakens the authority of the DPR in shaping the national discourse on lawmaking (Wijoyo and Redi, 2024).

From a communication theory perspective, this reflects a gap between technological capability and institutional communicative practice. Ren et al. (2025) argue that public websites should operate as civic ecosystems that enable participation rather than merely store information. Syaban et al. (2018) and Littlejohn and Foss (2009) emphasize that digital political communication should prioritize dialogic structure and user orientation. Yet, dpr.go.id remains largely one-directional in its communication model.

This paper offers actionable recommendations that urge reimagining the DPR website as an inclusive civic platform, emphasizing two-way communication and real-time engagement. It recommends improving feedback systems, redesigning access to key content such as UU TPKS, and embedding transparency through structured dialog. This study reframes Indonesian e-governance research by shifting focus from technical service delivery to the communicative function as a foundation of democratic engagement. While prior studies have broadly examined e-government in Indonesia (Syaban et al., 2018; Hidayaturrahman et al., 2024), this research applies Ong’s theory of secondary orality to analyze how the DPR website supports or limits participatory political communication. Following AlAfnan (2025), digital inaccessibility is framed as a communicative condition that affects both trust and inclusion. The guiding question is how the communicative performance of the DPR website shapes public understanding and engagement with the Sexual Violence Crime Law in the context of a democratizing digital society.

2 Literature review

In today’s digital governance landscape, institutional websites serve not only as information repositories but also as platforms for political communication and public engagement. Castells (2011) notes that digital networks have become arenas for collaborative interaction and civic life, requiring governments to treat online platforms as communicative spaces. For institutions like the Indonesian House of Representatives (DPR RI), this is especially relevant following the ratification of the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS), where public understanding directly affects trust and implementation.

Much of the existing literature focuses on general website management or digital governance without detailing how legislative platform design shapes citizen engagement with specific laws. Pethig et al. (2021) highlight the psychological and experiential dimensions of digital access, emphasizing the need for inclusive and stigma-aware infrastructures. The DPR’s online strategy, however, remains underexplored as a case study in legislative transparency. This study addresses that gap by applying theoretical models to the practical communication challenges of dpr.go.id in the context of UU TPKS.

Government websites are central to shaping both perception and participation. Research by Hong (2013) and Mwangi (2021) finds that public trust improves when digital platforms are transparent, interactive, and well-managed. However, these qualities remain inconsistently applied in practice. The DPR’s platform, particularly in relation to UU TPKS, illustrates how design gaps and inactive feedback systems can obstruct communication. This study examines these shortcomings empirically rather than assuming they are the result of missing content alone.

Communication performance also depends on content governance. Kotler (2007) emphasizes the importance of consistent and strategic information management for public engagement. When the DPR website lacks timely and structured updates on laws that address vulnerable populations, it diminishes public legitimacy. In the case of UU TPKS, the law’s complexity and emotional sensitivity heighten the need for effective institutional communication. As a legislative institution, the DPR has constitutional responsibilities to legislate, oversee, and represent (Emedia DPR RI, 2025). These duties require accessible digital communication. Given that Commission VIII and Commission X oversee policy domains relevant to UU TPKS, there is both functional and normative pressure for DPR to ensure clear and inclusive communication.

UU TPKS, passed in April 2022, is a result of long-standing civil society advocacy and addresses legal gaps in the protection of sexual violence victims. It outlines procedures for prevention, victim recovery, prosecution, and reform (Kemenppa, 2022). Despite its significance, public awareness of the law remains limited. Komnas Perempuan and media reports indicate that many legal provisions are still unfamiliar to the public. This study investigates that disconnect as a failure of digital political communication, where institutional silence impairs democratic accountability.

From a communication perspective, the DPR website is a performative medium whose structure and editorial decisions affect meaning-making. Theoretical contributions such as Lévy’s concept of new media (in Littlejohn and Foss, 2009), Bolter and Grusin (2000) remediation theory, and McQuail and Deuze (2020) media affordances help frame the website as a site for communicative negotiation rather than passive access. Ong (1982) theory of secondary orality provides a practical lens to evaluate whether the site supports participatory political communication.

Ong’s framework, which includes interactivity, dialogic capacity, communal participation, simultaneity, and digitalization, is used here to assess communicative performance. While features such as livestreaming and comment sections exist, their fragmented use reduces potential for sustained engagement. This study applies Ong’s dimensions not as abstract concepts but as thematic tools to evaluate communicative design and function.

Although prior literature has outlined digital governance principles, few studies empirically examine how legislative websites communicate the content and urgency of a single law such as UU TPKS. This paper fills that gap by evaluating the DPR’s platform as a political communication tool and offering a model that centers user experience, inclusion, and dialogic feedback in the practice of digital governance.

3 Methodology

This study employed a descriptive-interpretive qualitative approach, guided by thematic analysis. Data from interviews, institutional documents, and a website walkthrough were examined through iterative coding. Instead of focusing on reducing findings to numeric generalizations, this method enables a detailed verbal reconstruction of what is encountered on the website and among its users, aligning with Fiantika (2022) emphasis on contextual observation and field-based narratives. Anchored in an interpretive paradigm, this study examines how users engage with the DPR website and interpret its legislative messaging. Instead of treating the paradigm as a label, it is used as an analytical lens to trace meaning-making in digital spaces, following Moleong (2002). This perspective is especially relevant for analyzing political communication infrastructure, where process and interpretation are central, as emphasized by Neuman (1997).

The study followed a thematic analysis process, beginning with open and axial coding to identify patterns aligned with Ong (1982) communicative dimensions. Coding began with line-by-line open coding of interview transcripts and observation notes, followed by axial coding that grouped concepts into five main communicative themes. These themes were then cross-checked across data types for internal consistency. Coding was done manually using structured matrices and refined across data sources for coherence. Informants were purposively selected based on institutional relevance, expertise, and experience with the DPR website, with interviews lasting 90 to 180 min.

The four informants consisted of two internal actors from the DPR’s public communication analyst and news editor units, one academic expert in digital legislative outreach, and one active user who frequently accesses the site. The sampling criteria aimed to capture a range of perspectives from both internal and external stakeholders involved with the DPR’s digital communication. The informants were categorized as follows:

• Institutional Actors (Internal): Two key informants from the DPR’s public communication specialist and news editor units, selected for their direct involvement in managing the DPR website and communicating legislative updates.

• Academic Expert (External): One expert informant in digital legislative communication, chosen for their expertise on how digital platforms influence civic engagement and public participation.

• Civic User (External): One active user, a university student who frequently uses the DPR website, selected to provide insight into the public user experience and interaction with the site’s features.

Although limited to four participants, thematic convergence across roles and triangulation with documents and walkthroughs helped approach data saturation. Informant sufficiency was approached by thematic saturation, meaning that no new insights emerged from later interviews, particularly in the categories of institutional responsiveness and digital interface limitations.

Triangulation was conducted in three ways: (1) data triangulation across interviews, observations, and documents; (2) methodological triangulation using both walkthroughs and informant narratives; and (3) investigator triangulation through cross-validation between coders during theme refinement. These strategies strengthen the study’s validity by reinforcing analytical depth and transparency despite the small sample.

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, participant observation, and institutional documents. Informants were purposively chosen based on professional familiarity and experience with dpr.go.id in relation to UU TPKS (Sugiyono, 2022). Fieldwork involved prolonged engagement, with interviews transcribed, observations documented through annotated screenshots, and supporting materials drawn from press releases, archives, and interaction records (Hikmawati, 2020). Thematic analysis was used to identify core patterns, and triangulation across sources and perspectives ensured consistency and analytical depth.

Although the informant composition centers on institutional and expert perspectives, deliberately chosen to explore DPR’s internal communication practices, it limits the breadth of civic representation, with only one active user included. To address the limited scope of user perspectives in the current dataset, this study chooses to frame the findings as researcher reflections on the affordances and limitations of the DPR website. Rather than claiming to represent broad user experiences, the analysis emphasizes interpretive insights drawn from the site walkthrough and institutional viewpoints. This constraint highlights the study’s exploratory focus on institutional dynamics rather than generalizing public opinion. Future research should engage more diverse users, including civil society actors, and survivors’ advocates.

For clarity and confidentiality in reporting, we refer to these participants by generic identifiers linked to their roles. Specifically, the two internal DPR’s portal management members are labeled as Key Informant 1 and Key Informant 2, the academic expert is labeled as the Expert Informant, and the student user is labeled as the Supporting Informant. These labels are used when presenting quotes to clearly attribute each statement to the respective interviewee. A summary of the informants, including their role and assigned code, is provided in Table 1.

Table 1

Table 1. List of interview participant.

This research followed ethical standards for qualitative research, including informed consent, voluntary participation, and role anonymization. Participants were briefed about their rights and could withdraw at any stage. To protect confidentiality, pseudonyms and role labels (see Table 1) were assigned and are used throughout the analysis when quoting informants. Ethical clearance was obtained from the research ethics board at Telkom University.

The analytical lens draws directly from Ong (1982) theory of secondary orality, not merely to describe digital platforms but to dissect how dpr.go.id operationalizes or fails to operationalize the five key dimensions identified by Ong. These include interactivity, which was examined through responsiveness to user input; dialogical capacity, assessed through interface structure and feedback pathways; communal participation, by analyzing how the site facilitates public contribution; simultaneity, evaluated through the timeliness of posted content; and digitalization, analyzed through the accessibility of legal information. Ong’s framework was thus deployed as a tool to read communicative performance, highlighting whether the platform reinforces bureaucratic distance or invites inclusive engagement with national legislation.

4 Results

This section presents findings structured around two key themes: public opinion formation and dialogical capacity, interpreted through a walkthrough of the DPR website and interviews with institutional and expert informants. Given the limited user data, the analysis reflects researcher-led interpretations of the site’s communicative features rather than direct accounts of public engagement. Ong (1982) five dimensions of secondary orality (interactivity, dialogic capacity, communal participation, simultaneity, and digitalization) guided both the coding process and thematic organization. Rather than serving as fixed metrics, these dimensions function as heuristic tools to interpret how civic communication is enabled or constrained. Each dimension frames a section of the analysis, supported by empirical examples from site observation and interview data that illustrate the extent to which the DPR website fulfills its communicative roles.

4.1 Public opinion formation through communication management of dpr.Go.Id on the sexual violence crime law (UU TPKS)

Effective public communication on a government website is essential to prevent one-way information pattern. As the official platform of Indonesia’s legislative body, dpr.go.id serves as the primary gateway for legislative transparency and public access. In early 2025, the DPR revamped its interface to make it more accessible and user-friendly. The updated interface (see Figure 1) features prominent navigation links to DPR news, the National Legislative Program (PROLEGNAS), TVR Parliament, and public service menus.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Latest homepage display of dpr.go.id. Source: dpr.go.id website (March 2025).

Among the legislative products requiring broader dissemination is the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS). According to Key Informant 1, the website facilitates public interaction through features such as the aspiration portal, feedback forums on the PROLEGNAS page, and live comment threads during TVR Parliament broadcasts.

These tools enable users to track legislative developments, submit comments, and, in some cases, receive direct responses from DPR representatives. However, Key Informant 2 highlight that although public commenting features are available, they are often underused or only superficially monitored. This results in a gap between the website’s technical interactivity and its practical application. It creates a discrepancy between the website’s technical interactivity and its practical implementation.

A Supporting Informant reported the following experience:

When I attempted to file a complaint through the online form, it was successful, but I never received a confirmation or response. It left me unsure whether it was even read.

From the institutional side, efforts such as assigning Dumas (Pengaduan Masyarakat/Public Complaint) officers and providing direct contact information reflect a degree of openness. However, Expert Informant warned that feedback tools will not foster engagement if they are not prominently displayed or consistently responded to. According to them:

Interactivity isn't just about having tools; it's about using them effectively. It's about making people feel heard. A response system must be quick and consistent otherwise the trust collapses.

Features like search engines do help users locate specific documents, including UU TPKS, but options to filter by date or content type are limited. This can discourage users from interacting more deeply with the site. Moreover, many documents related to UU TPKS are not placed on the homepage, requiring visitors to dig through layers of menus.

One informant confirmed that although the Dumas form is visible on the homepage, “we rarely get responses unless someone follows up by phone” (Key Informant 1). Another noted, “I once submitted feedback and received no confirmation or reply, not even an automated email” (Supporting Informant). These statements echoed across all interviews, suggesting a pattern in which communicative features fail to deliver meaningful user interaction. This reinforces the conclusion that while digital tools are available, DPR’s communication remains predominantly symbolic rather than participatory.

In summary, although dpr.go.id has laid the groundwork for interactive public communication, it has yet to optimize these tools. Feedback systems remain underdeveloped, homepage visibility is inconsistent, and response times are slow. To transform the site into a participatory digital space for legal engagement, DPR must enhance responsiveness, simplify access, and prominently display high-priority content such as UU TPKS.

4.2 User opinion formation in sustained dialog on the DPR website regarding the sexual violence crime law (UU TPKS)

To shape user opinion effectively, the DPR website should encourage ongoing dialog rather than relying solely on static information. The site features feedback channels, comment forms, and TVR Parlemen streams designed to facilitate interaction, particularly regarding key laws such as UU TPKS.

Key informant 1 explained that the site’s dialogic function is evident in the frequency of reports shared and the attention given to feedback on the legislative agenda. As they stated:

The dialogic strength of the site is evident in how users engage with the feedback section in PROLEGNAS and how frequently our updates are shared. Sometimes, they even become trending topics elsewhere.

However, key informant 2 observed that this interaction remains one-sided. Although tools like comment sections exist, they are not moderated consistently, and DPR responses are rare. The supporting informant described joining a live comment thread and noted:

We could reply to each other, and that shaped opinions, but there was no institutional reply.

DPR utilizes focus group discussions to solicit citizen input; however, these are not integrated into the website and tend to reach only the invited audience. The expert informant emphasized the lack of follow-up on digital feedback, adding that the site still lacks features for structured dialog (see Figure 2). They also recommended adding AI tools to filter comments and enable public discourse.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Complaint recapitulation without structured dialog. Source: dpr.go.id website (March 2025).

DPR is reportedly addressing these weaknesses in the next redesign, influenced by the 2020 Open Parliament Indonesia survey. While improvements are underway, current dialog features are limited. Feedback often goes unanswered, and users rarely receive updates on their input.

Without consistent moderation and response mechanisms, user trust and engagement remain low. The absence of comment space under key articles, such as UU TPKS, also reduces visibility for public input. Features such as live chat or AI-assisted moderation could address this gap and improve the quality of civic dialog.

Overall, while the DPR website provides basic infrastructure for dialog, it lacks the consistency and responsiveness necessary to foster meaningful two-way interaction on sensitive laws, such as UU TPKS.

4.3 Analysis of public opinion formation through user involvement in the management of dpr.Go.Id on the sexual violence crime law (UU TPKS)

Direct user involvement plays a vital role in reinforcing legislative transparency and inclusivity. The DPR website offers several features aimed at encouraging civic participation, such as the agenda calendar, public visit interface, live stream access via TVR Parlemen, and member profiles. These tools are intended to help users track sessions, learn about representatives, and engage with parliamentary activities.

Key Informant 1 explained that these features provide the public with the ability to view daily schedules (see Figure 3), access session broadcasts, and follow ongoing deliberations, particularly on prominent laws like UU TPKS. Meanwhile, Key Informant 2 emphasized the role of accessible member profiles, asserting that this visibility helps the DPR act as a bridge between policymakers and the people.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Agenda feature display. Source: dpr.go.id website (March 2025).

From the user side, engagement remains limited. A Supporting Informant reported the following experience:

When I attempted to file a complaint through the online form, it was successful, but I never received a confirmation or response. It left me unsure whether it was even read.

Although structured participation is technically available, the absence of confirmation, follow-up, or status tracking often weakens the impact. The DPR allows public visits, including both offline and online formats, which are coordinated through its Public Relations Division. Still, these are episodic and do not replace the need for sustained online dialog.

An Expert Informant noted that simply offering access tools is not enough. Feedback loops must be active and visible. According to the expert, unless responses are timely and meaningful, users will feel excluded, undermining the trust required for democratic participation.

Overall, the DPR website demonstrates an institutional will to involve the public through multiple entry points, including schedules, livestreams, public visits, and legislative updates. Yet, without consistent interactivity and responsive engagement, these features risk remaining symbolic rather than substantive. Strengthening the dialogic infrastructure, especially for high-stakes laws like UU TPKS, would help ensure users feel not only informed but also heard.

4.4 Public opinion formation through synchronization in the management of dpr.Go.Id on the sexual violence crime law (UU TPKS)

Synchronization on the DPR website enables users to access legislative information across formats, including news updates, legal drafts, meeting transcripts, livestreams, and feedback forms. These features are intended to present an integrated communication experience by aligning content delivery, public response mechanisms, and institutional visibility.

Key Informant 1 noted that the availability of synchronized features helps the public monitor institutional performance and legislative progress in real-time. Live coverage of plenary sessions through TVR Parlemen provides direct access to ongoing deliberations, including those related to UU TPKS. Key Informant 2 emphasized that these sessions are complemented by the DUMAS complaint system (see Figure 4), which is supported by dedicated monitoring teams to track public input.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Complaint page display on the DPR RI website. Source: dpr.go.id website (March 2025).

A Supporting Informant shared this experience:

I’ve submitted a complaint via the website. The form is there, the contact page is clear, but the response time is very slow. It doesn’t feel real-time.

This reflects the disconnect between the system’s design and its practical responsiveness. Although detailed infographics exist to explain complaint processing and some submissions are followed up by legislators, these tools are often buried within submenus and not featured on the homepage. The absence of intuitive navigation hinders public awareness and discourages use.

An Expert Informant highlighted that real-time access must be matched by real-time feedback. Without consistent response speed and visible follow-up, the promise of synchronization remains largely symbolic. Compared to regional legislative sites that offer easier access to feedback links, the national DPR site lags in usability.

While synchronization allows simultaneous access to various forms of content, the lack of responsiveness undermines the site’s potential as a dialogic platform. To support laws like UU TPKS more effectively, the DPR must improve homepage architecture, elevate the visibility of complaint tools, and ensure that feedback processes are prompt and transparent. Moreover, synchronization must foster not only transparency but also authentic interaction between the institution and the public.

4.5 Public opinion formation through the digital format in the management of dpr.Go.Id on the sexual violence crime law (UU TPKS)

In today’s digital era, the format of information delivery plays a critical role in shaping public engagement. As an official legislative platform, the DPR website enhances accessibility and transparency by providing users with on-demand access to bills, meeting transcripts, news updates, and member profiles. This continuous access supports informed opinion formation, especially regarding legal frameworks such as UU TPKS (see Figure 5).

Figure 5

Figure 5. Display of legal archives and documentation of DPR. Source: DPR RI Website (March 2025).

According to Key Informant 1, the digital format has enabled broader dissemination of verified legislative content and serves as a counter to misinformation. They explained:

We actively inform the public that they can access comprehensive and accurate information on legislation directly from the DPR website.

The website incorporates various tools to promote public understanding, including infographics that illustrate the legislative process and downloadable files in multiple formats. Yet, Supporting Informant found that some features remain hard to locate due to nested menus and limited homepage visibility. They shared:

I tried looking for a specific draft, but it took a long time because the navigation wasn't straightforward and the filters didn't provide much help.

To address this, the DPR is developing a simplified interface with advanced search capabilities and improved document categorization. These improvements aim to create a user-centered experience where information is not only available but also easily retrievable by all levels of users.

Expert Informant stressed that digital availability must also be supported by immediacy. They noted:

The website must be faster than the media. If the public does not find information on the website, they will turn to other sources that may not be accurate.

Although TVR Parlemen livestreams and legislative calendars contribute to digital transparency, real-time responsiveness is still lacking. Without faster updates and better search functionality, the website’s potential as a democratic communication platform remains underutilized.

Overall, the DPR’s use of digital format demonstrates a clear commitment to transparency and public education. However, to fully support public opinion formation on critical laws like UU TPKS, the website must enhance speed, interface usability, and real-time responsiveness. These improvements are vital to ensuring that all users can access trustworthy legislative information efficiently and participate meaningfully in the democratic process.

5 Discussion

5.1 Interactivity and dialogic communication

The findings primarily reflect institutional and expert interpretations of communicative performance rather than mass-user perception. As such, the analysis prioritizes depth over breadth, focusing on how institutional routines shape participatory communication rather than quantifying public sentiment. This interpretive limitation is acknowledged as a methodological boundary rather than a weakness, inviting future comparative studies involving more varied user populations.

The results indicate that although dpr.go.id incorporates elements of digital infrastructure to enhance public understanding of the UU TPKS, the current digital infrastructure is implemented inconsistently. From the perspective of communication studies, the website displays any issue between traditional one-way dissemination and contemporary demands for dialogical and participatory engagement. Based on our results, six main issues were identified as relevant to Ong (1982) framework on secondary orality, existing literature on digital governance and website management.

First, the platform’s interactivity is limited. While features like TVR Parlemen, feedback channels, and live comment sections do exist, users report infrequent or delayed institutional responses. The literature affirms that interactivity must go beyond passive reception and support real-time, reciprocal communication. As Ong explains, secondary orality revives the participatory dynamics of oral culture within a digital environment. Yet, in this case, institutional responsiveness remains minimal. This reveals a failure to fully embrace the dialogical capacity of new media. Medaglia (2012) emphasizes that digital civic participation involves not only access to information but also the affective and deliberative dimensions of engagement, reflecting both civic duty and emotional involvement. Participation is not a passive process, but rather a creative and pleasurable one where users seek not only to consume but also to contribute meaning. If dpr.go.id fails to recognize this participatory drive, it risks alienating its civic base.

Second, dialogical capacity is constrained by the absence of structured conversation tools. As documented in the results, although some features allow feedback, these are rarely promoted, monitored, or followed up. Instead of fostering a conversation between DPR and its constituents, the platform often functions as a static archive. This condition contradicts Littlejohn and Foss (2009) assertion that communication in digital networks should be audience-centered and dialogic. Users want to be heard and involved, not simply informed.

Third, communal involvement is hampered by the site’s usability and the lack of tools that facilitate the co-production of meaning. As the literature review highlights, institutions should build spaces for shared meaning-making. On dpr.go.id, the aspiration forum, and comment sections are underutilized and not actively encouraged. Although users can technically provide input, no feedback loop validates or incorporates their participation. This runs counter to Verma et al.’s (2017) view that websites must act as dynamic interfaces, not static catalogs. Prisgunanto et al. (2025) similarly argue that successful public websites require not only frequent updates and easy navigation but also a strategic channel selection and dynamic content design that actively retains audience attention and encourages return visits. In the case of DPR, outdated interface design and poor user experience undermine this potential.

Fourth, simultaneity is compromised. While some sessions are live-streamed, legislative updates, including those related to UU TPKS, are often delayed or missing from the homepage. During testing, users were unable to locate recent information on UU TPKS without performing deep navigation. This inefficiency constrains the platform’s ability to perform its real-time communicative function, which Ong identifies as a fundamental element of digital orality.

Fifth, the digitalization of information is uneven. While the site includes archives, legislative texts, and downloadable documents, search functionality is weak, and content is poorly organized. Kotler (2007) emphasize that effective digital communication must include searchability, clarity, and relevance. This is particularly important for laws like UU TPKS, which require an accessible presentation for public comprehension.

Finally, broader communication literature urges that digital government platforms must be purposefully managed. Ren et al. (2025) stress that websites are not neutral tools but ideological expressions of institutional priorities. When public feedback is ignored or difficult to submit, the website conveys a lack of interest in participatory democracy. Likewise, AlAfnan (2025) notes that omissions in digital communication reflect intentional choices, not just technical shortcomings. In the case of dpr.go.id, the inconsistent promotion of UU TPKS and the removal of dozens of related articles during the 2025 redesign signal a misalignment with democratic ideals.

In sum, although dpr.go.id includes several tools aligned with the principles of new media, its implementation lacks the consistency and responsiveness necessary to support public understanding and engagement with UU TPKS. The platform exhibits the technological trappings of interactivity without fostering a genuine participatory space. To realize its democratic potential, the DPR must reframe digital communication not as content delivery but as public dialog. This requires institutional will, continuous evaluation, and transparent editorial choices that prioritize citizen inclusion.

5.2 User opinion formation through sustained dialog

The results indicate that the DPR website aspires to foster user engagement through dialogic features, but these are not fully operationalized to shape sustained public discourse. The structure of dpr.go.id still leans toward unidirectional communication, with only limited spaces for reciprocal interaction. When evaluated through Walter J. Ong’s theory of secondary orality and related frameworks in public digital communication, it is evident that the platform does not yet facilitate the long-term opinion formation necessary for public understanding of UU TPKS.

Interactivity, as Ong (1982) describes it, must enable shared presence between communicators. However, user comments on legislative broadcasts, feedback portals, and aspiration forms receive minimal response. This limits any real dialogical capacity. Ong (1982) argues that secondary orality in digital systems should reintroduce the participatory ethos of oral tradition. Yet, on the DPR website, communication remains symbolic mainly, with dialogic channels left open but structurally dormant.

The challenge lies not in the absence of tools but in their inadequate integration within a responsive and communicative institutional framework. This gap reflects Ong’s notion of secondary orality, which emphasizes reciprocal and relational communication rather than passive consumption. In the case of dpr.go.id, features such as complaint forms or live comment menus do exist, but their impact is undermined by the absence of feedback loops that build trust. Abatchi (2012) argues that citizen input gains meaning only when it visibly informs institutional outcomes, while Medaglia and Zheng (2017) highlight that digital engagement must be supported by real-time responsiveness to maintain legitimacy and inclusion. These perspectives underscore that without dialogic reinforcement, legislative platforms risk becoming symbolic rather than functional spaces of participation.

Moreover, the other weakness is the absence of thematic hubs or curated forums dedicated to major laws such as the UU TPKS. This reflects what Graham et al. (2015) identify as a central challenge in digital democracy: the need to create structured online environments that facilitate deliberation and collective meaning-making. Without such dedicated spaces, civic discourse becomes fragmented, and institutional websites like dpr.go.id fail to cultivate sustained engagement around complex legislative issues. While comment sections may appear during livestreams, they remain disconnected from the legal materials that require deeper civic dialog.

Temporal immediacy also suffers. While users can join real-time discussions through TVR Parliament streams, most dialogs occur in isolation and are not archived for reference or extended interaction. This undermines the simultaneity that Ong (1982) considers a hallmark of digital orality. For public dialog to persist, the conversation must be traceable, accessible, and embedded within a broader communicative loop that includes follow-up and policy feedback.

As highlighted in a recent bibliometric study, political communication in the digital age is increasingly shaped by issues of trust, responsiveness, and platform structure, with sustained interaction becoming a central marker of effective public relations in political institutions (Sjoraida, 2025). This reflects the necessity of integrating participatory design into state communication systems—not only for information dissemination but for cultivating democratic legitimacy.

Moreover, emerging participatory cultures demonstrate that citizens are increasingly seeking genuine dialog and the co-creation of meaning, rather than just access to information. Jenkins et al. (2013) describe how audiences function as “meaning-makers” in participatory environments, actively reshaping content and contributing to community discourse. This supports the need for government websites like dpr.go.id to evolve into platforms for civic co-engagement, rather than mere archives. In sum, while the DPR website introduces several dialogical elements, it stops short of enabling a sustained digital public sphere. As the literature affirms, dialogical spaces must be actively curated, technologically supported, and normatively integrated into institutional practices (Benkler, 2006). The failure to sustain user conversation beyond single interactions indicates a deeper hesitation to embrace participatory communication. To truly foster public opinion formation on critical issues like UU TPKS, the DPR must redesign its digital platform not only to deliver information but also to host ongoing, inclusive, and responsive discourse.

5.3 Unidirectional public participation

Walter J. Ong (1982) concept of secondary orality provides a powerful starting point to analyze the role of user involvement on dpr.go.id. According to Ong, digital platforms possess the capacity to revive participatory communication patterns that resemble oral culture. These include communal participation, simultaneity, and dialogical engagement. However, these characteristics are only partially present in the management of the DPR website. While the platform offers users access to legislative content and daily schedules, it rarely fosters the conditions necessary for co-authoring public opinion.

The findings show that although the website features tools such as the “Agenda” section, TVR Parlemen integration, public visitation schedule, and legislator profiles, these are largely unidirectional. They inform rather than invite meaningful interaction. Public feedback mechanisms exist but are not accompanied by strong follow-up systems. This breaks the loop of digital dialog that Ong describes, resulting in symbolic rather than substantive participation.

This is consistent with Vossen et al. (2017), who argue that websites should serve as dynamic spaces of interaction rather than simply passive repositories of information. In the case of dpr.go.id, interaction is technically available but rarely facilitated. The absence of live forums, structured Q&A tools, or status-tracking for submitted feedback hinders the transformation of users from observers into active participants in legal discourse.

Yanti (2022) explains that participatory government communication requires digital infrastructures that are intuitively designed and consistently monitored. In practice, the DPR website remains limited in both respects. Tools such as the public complaint form and aspiration channel are not promoted prominently on the homepage, and responses often arrive late, if at all. These technical gaps reflect an underlying institutional hesitation to open up space for critical dialog, especially regarding sensitive laws such as UU TPKS.

This weakness is further exacerbated when viewed in conjunction with the website’s content architecture. During the researcher’s observation, key articles and legal documents related to UU TPKS were not featured prominently and were challenging to locate without direct search input. According to Hidayaturrahman et al. (2024), the DPR bears not only legislative responsibility but also a mandate for inclusive public communication. The underutilization of user involvement features on the site contradicts this dual obligation.

From a broader digital governance perspective, the quality of interface and information architecture significantly shapes how users engage with the law. Djatmiko et al. (2025) explain that digital inclusion demands user-centric design, including straightforward navigation and visual cues that guide citizens to key content. Afiyah (2024) found that e-government platforms that combine transparency with active citizen participation tend to earn higher public trust and engagement. Zhang and Nie (2025) highlight that integrating AI-assisted interactions on government websites enhances clarity, responsiveness, and citizens’ feeling of being heard, all essential for democratic legitimacy.

Together, these studies suggest that websites like dpr.go.id must go beyond publishing documents and updates. They require intuitive layouts, consistent content freshness, and interactive components (potentially powered by AI) to ensure users can easily locate, comprehend, and engage with legislative information.

As Sjoraida (2025) highlights through her global bibliometric study, political communication research increasingly emphasizes participatory platforms and public trust, especially following crises such as COVID-19. DPR’s website must thus evolve beyond static display to align with international best practices.

The findings also align with AlAfnan (2025) assertion that the absence of communicative tools is not merely a technical failure but reflects institutional choices. The removal of over 90 UU TPKS-related articles during the 2025 redesign further supports this view. When content related to a nationally significant law is not prioritized in digital presentation, it signals a reluctance to invite public interpretation or critique. Such editorial decisions have long-term implications for public understanding and support.

In conclusion, although dpr.go.id presents a range of technical features that allow for limited user involvement, the site does not yet function as an integrated platform for participatory democracy. From Ong’s perspective, it lacks the dialogical rhythm and communal interaction that define successful digital communication. To improve public understanding of UU TPKS and fulfill its communicative mandate, the DPR must redesign its user involvement strategies to prioritize interaction, visibility, and institutional responsiveness. This includes embedding real-time engagement tools, promoting two-way communication prominently on the homepage, and ensuring that citizen input is acknowledged and reflected in follow-up actions.

5.4 Concurrent and real time communication

The increasing urgency of addressing sexual violence in Indonesia forms the backdrop against which this study evaluates the performance of dpr.go.id. The sheer volume of cases recorded by Komnas Perempuan and documented by reputable institutions such as Equal Measures Equal 2030, 2024, Reuters Institute, and the Montaigne Center reflects not only a social crisis but also a communication gap between legislative efforts and public awareness. This gap becomes especially evident in the context of UU TPKS, where public understanding of the law remains limited despite its legal and symbolic significance.

The DPR website, as an official platform for legislative communication, is expected to facilitate transparency and civic engagement. Yet, the findings show that while the site hosts documents, schedules, and complaint forms, these tools are difficult to access, inconsistently updated, and weakly integrated. The digital infrastructure lacks the responsive and dialogic design necessary to fulfill its democratic role. This is consistent with Ong (1982) theory of secondary orality, which emphasizes the need for interactivity, communal participation, and real-time feedback in digital communication.

From a broader digital governance perspective, the site’s shortcomings reveal systemic issues. As Ren et al. (2025) point out, digital platforms are not neutral; they either promote or inhibit participatory governance depending on how they are designed and managed. Similarly, Syaban et al. (2018) and Littlejohn and Foss (2009) argue that state-run websites must adapt to changing public expectations by embracing two-way communication models.

This issue echoes Medaglia and Zheng (2017) findings, which suggest that digital platforms must not only provide participation tools but also facilitate real-time, visible feedback loops to maintain public trust and engagement. Their study emphasizes that without continuous feedback, even well-designed public tools fail to generate sustained civic participation. For example, Abatchi (2012) emphasizes the design of participation frameworks that both solicit and respond to citizen input to reinforce public values. In the case of dpr.go.id, citizens can submit feedback, but institutional silence undermines inclusion and weakens the perception that public opinion influences parliamentary processes.

In conclusion, the findings suggest that dpr.go.id operates below its potential as a democratic communication tool. While it offers surface-level transparency through legislative archives and livestreams, it lacks the interactivity, responsiveness, and public-centered design necessary for substantive engagement. To support laws like UU TPKS effectively, the DPR must transform its digital infrastructure into a platform that not only informs but also listens, responds, and empowers. This transformation requires not just technical redesign but also a cultural shift within the institution, one that embraces digital leadership, participatory communication, and inclusive governance as foundational principles.

5.5 From digital format to public trust

This disconnect between format and function resonates with Ong’s (1982) theory of secondary orality, which underscores the need for dialogical immediacy and interactive environments in digital communication. The findings show that dpr.go.id continues to operate as a document repository rather than a platform of participatory exchange, which also aligns with the argument of Medaglia and Zhu (2017), who stress that digital transparency requires not only data access but also active engagement tools to foster public deliberation.

From a broader digital governance perspective, the quality of the interface and information architecture significantly influences how users interact with the law. Bertot et al. (2010) emphasize that poorly structured government websites can undermine transparency and limit public engagement, especially when navigation and responsiveness are weak. Mickoleit (2014) notes that government portals increasingly compete with social media in delivering timely content, and failure to adapt reduces institutional credibility in the digital public sphere. Additionally, Criado and Gil-Garcia (2019) argue that disorganized or static digital content not only reduces usability but also weakens citizens’ trust in democratic processes, especially when public expectations for interactivity are unmet.

This is where the implications from the introduction and literature review deepen the discussion. Given that over 90 percent of rape survivors in Indonesia never report their cases due to fear and lack of clarity on institutional procedures (Change.org Indonesia, 2023), the digital inaccessibility of dpr.go.id exacerbates barriers to justice. Digital communication is not merely a technical asset but a social instrument that shapes civic trust and policy legitimacy.

As Prisgunanto et al. (2025) explains, the failure of legislative websites to evolve into interactive platforms undermines their role in fostering transparency and civic trust. This problem is compounded when features such as E-Parliament are neither promoted nor integrated into broader public engagement strategies. Mallek et al. (2025) further argue that digital governance must prioritize user experience, emphasizing real-time responsiveness, navigational clarity, and communication consistency to prevent digital platforms from becoming performative symbols of openness. Building on this premise, the study offers a conceptual framework that applies Ong’s secondary orality to the DPR’s digital communication. The diagram below (see Table 2) synthesizes Ong’s dimensions with field findings, highlighting institutional gaps and serving as a tool to evaluate communicative performance in parliamentary platforms.

Table 2

Table 2. Evaluative framework for online political communication in parliamentary platforms (adapted from Ong’s secondary orality).

In conclusion, while the DPR’s adoption of a digital format signals a commitment to transparency and legislative access, it has yet to become an effective platform for shaping public opinion. To fully support laws such as UU TPKS, the institution must elevate its digital responsiveness, improve its user interface, and actively integrate interactive communication tools. Only then can the platform move from symbolic transparency toward authentic civic engagement. Here the model is constructed based on the five discussions above:

While Table 3 highlights critical design limitations based on the five communicative dimensions, the assessment is grounded in interpretive analysis drawn from a triangulation of institutional walkthroughs and key informant interviews (see Table 1). Although it does not present quantified user data, each communicative weakness reflects recurring patterns identified across Sections 4.1 to 4.5. As such, the table serves not as a statistical tool but as a structured conceptual framework that translates qualitative findings into evaluative criteria. It may guide future studies that seek to examine user experience more directly or assess civic trust through participatory interaction and feedback. To make this contribution more explicit, this study offers an applied analytical framework that combines Ong’s theory of secondary orality with field-based findings from the DPR’s digital communication on UU TPKS. The synthesized matrix links Ong’s communicative dimensions with observed institutional practices and digital limitations. This visual framework is intended as a heuristic tool for future research evaluating communicative performance in parliamentary digital platforms.

Table 3

Table 3. Secondary orality models of Ong from Indonesian parliament’s online communication on sexual violence.

6 Conclusion

This study explores the DPR website’s role as a communicative interface in the implementation of the Sexual Violence Crime Law (UU TPKS), revealing significant gaps in its potential to foster civic trust and engagement. While the platform offers various digital governance features (such as livestreams, legislative schedules, and feedback tools) these tools are underutilized and fail to enable meaningful public participation. The DPR website, despite its technical capacity, operates more as a one-way institutional broadcast rather than a space for reciprocal dialog, thereby contributing to a trust deficit in the legislative process.

Using Ong (1982) framework of secondary orality, this study analyzes five communicative dimensions: interactivity, dialogic capacity, communal participation, simultaneity, and digitalization. Each dimension highlights critical areas where the DPR’s digital communication falls short, shifting the focus from mere information dissemination to participatory reform. Findings demonstrate how responsiveness breaks down, such as through neglected public feedback and inaccessible legal content. These shortcomings reflect not only technical deficiencies but also deeper institutional norms within Indonesia’s evolving political communication culture. In this context, transparency must shift from passive information disclosure to structured dialog and reciprocal engagement.

To address these issues, the study calls for the reimagining of dpr.go.id as an inclusive civic infrastructure that prioritizes two-way communication and real-time engagement. Actionable recommendations include strengthening feedback mechanisms to ensure timely responses to public input, redesigning the website to ensure easy access to high-priority content like UU TPKS, and embedding transparency in digital practices through structured dialog and proactive interaction.

This study challenges the traditional focus of e-governance research in Indonesia, which often centers on service delivery and technical aspects, by emphasizing communicative function as a core component of democratic engagement. Future research should expand on these findings by exploring user behavior analytics and participatory design methods to assess how diverse publics interact with legislative platforms. Comparative studies across Southeast Asian parliaments could offer valuable insights into the structural and cultural conditions that enable more dialogic public engagement. Crucially, further work is needed to examine how marginalized groups, especially survivors of sexual violence, navigate these digital spaces and whether they find meaningful inclusion or exclusion in platforms that claim to represent the public.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Telkom University Board of Ethic Committee. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.

Author contributions

DP: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MA: Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. IW: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LW: Project administration, Resources, Software, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Abatchi, T. (2012). Putting the “public” Back in public values research: designing participation to identify and respond to values. Public Adm. Rev. 72, 699–708. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2012.02544.x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Afiyah, N. (2024). Transparency and participation in local e-government: a study on citizen trust in Indonesia. Global J. Social Political Res. 4, 112–124.

Google Scholar

AlAfnan, M. A. M. (2025). Silences in institutional media: power, omission, and digital legitimacy. Stud. Media Commun. 13, 62–90. doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i2.7512,

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Benkler, Y. (2006). The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, Connecticut, USA: Yale University Press.

Google Scholar

Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., and Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Gov. Inf. Q. 27, 264–271. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Bolter, J. D., and Grusin, R. (2000). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Google Scholar

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society. 2nd Edn. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Google Scholar

Change.org Indonesia (2023) 90 Persen Korban Pemerkosaan Tidak Melapor: Sebuah Laporan Kampanye Digital

Google Scholar

Criado, J. I., and Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2019). Creating public value through smart technologies and strategies: from digital services to artificial intelligence and beyond. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 32, 438–450. doi: 10.1108/IJPSM-07-2019-0178

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Djatmiko, W. A., Yudatama, U., and Azmi, F. (2025). Digital inclusion and legislative communication: redesigning government platforms for civic engagement. Sustainability 17:2908. doi: 10.3390/su17072908

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Emedia DPR RI (2025). Laporan Evaluasi Desain Ulang Situs DPR

Google Scholar

Fiantika, R. (2022). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Padang: PT Global Eksekutif Teknologi.

Google Scholar

Graham, T., Jackson, D., and Broersma, M. (2015). New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns. New Media Soc. 18, 765–783. doi: 10.1177/1461444814546728

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hidayaturrahman, M., Purwanto, E., Sinaga, A., Ubaid, A., Wardhani, W., and Sugiantiningsih, A. (2024). Public expectations towards the roles of the Indonesian house of representatives. Jurnal Studi Komunikasi 8, 183–194. doi: 10.25139/jsk.v8i1.7432

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Hikmawati, F. (2020). Metodologi Penelitian. Depok: Rajawali Pers.

Google Scholar

Hong, H. (2013). Government websites and social media’s influence on government–public relationships. Public Relat. Rev. 39, 346–356. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.007

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Jenkins, H., Ford, S., and Green, J. (2013). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture. Newyork, USA: New York University Press.

Google Scholar

Just, N., and Latzer, M. (2017). Governance by algorithms: Reality construction by algorithmic selection on the Internet. Media, Culture & Society, 39, 238–258. doi: 10.1177/0163443716643157

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Kemenppa, J. D. I. H. (2022). Undang-undang Nomor 12/2022 Tentang Tindak Pidana Kekerasan Seksual. Jakarta: Kementerian Pemberdayaan Perempuan dan Anak.

Google Scholar

Kotler, P. (2007). Marketing: An introduction. London, UK: Pearson Education Inc.

Google Scholar

Littlejohn, S. W., and Foss, K. A. (2009). Encyclopedia of communication theory. Thousand Oak, CA, USA: SAGE Publications.

Google Scholar

Mallek, M., Mohamed, E., Farhi, F., Jeljeli, R., Alquqa, E., Bougherza, R., et al. (2025). Effectiveness of AI-driven public relations strategies in advancing sustainable development initiatives: a case study of leading organizations in the United Arab Emirates. Stud. Media Commun. 13, 56–68. doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i4.7791

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

McQuail, D., and Deuze, M. (2020). McQuail’s media & mass communication theory, vol. 15. 7th Edn. UK: Sage Publications, 67–70.

Google Scholar

Measures Equal 2030 (2024) Breaking the silence: Combating feminicide and gender-based violence in Indonesia.

Google Scholar

Medaglia, R. (2012). Eparticipation research: moving characterization forward (2006–2011). Gov. Inf. Q. 29, 346–360. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2012.02.010

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Medaglia, R., and Zheng, L. (2017). Mapping government social media research and moving it forward: a framework and a research agenda. Gov. Inf. Q. 34, 496–510. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2017.06.001

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Medaglia, R., and Zhu, D. (2017). Public deliberation on government-managed social media: A study on Weibo users in China. Governm Inform Quar. 34, 533–544. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2017.05.003

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Mickoleit, A. (2014). Social Media Use by Governments: A Policy Primer to Discuss Trends, Identify Policy Opportunities and Guide Decision Makers. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 26. OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/5jxrcmghmk0s-eniL

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Moleong, L. (2002). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung, PT: Remaja Rosda Karya.

Google Scholar

Montaigne Centre for Rule of Law and Administration of Justice (2022) Gender-based violence in Indonesia: A 50% surge in reported cases, Komnas Perempuan data shows

Google Scholar

Mwangi, S. C. (2021). A survey of civic engagement tools and capabilities of city and county government web sites. Online J. Commun. Media Technol. 11:e202123. doi: 10.30935/ojcmt/11255

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Neuman, W. L. (1997). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. 3rd Edn. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Google Scholar

Ong, W. (1982). Orality & Literacy. New York: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Openparlement.id (2024). Survei Akses Publik terhadap Situs DPR RI

Google Scholar

Parlementaria. (2024). Transparansi Digital dan Peran DPR dalam UU TPKS. Parlementaria Edisi Khusus 2024.

Google Scholar

Pethig, F., Kroenung, J., and Noeltner, M. (2021). A stigma power perspective on digital government service avoidance. Gov. Inf. Q. 38, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2020.101545

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Prisgunanto, I., Pranawukir, I., and Rusmawan, T. (2025). Digital public communication in image building: a survey of ASEAN official website. Stud. Media Commun. 13:170. doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i3.7565,

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Ren, X., Nugroho, Y., and Hartono, A. (2025). Digital communication and institutional trust: designing participatory government websites. Stud. Media Commun. 11, 22–39. doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i1.7186

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sjoraida, D. F. (2025). Contemporary trends in political communication and public relations: A global bibliometric analysis of research patterns in political discourse (2020–2024). Studies in Media and Communication, 13, 148–156, doi: 10.11114/smc.v13i3.7602

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sugiyono, P. (2022). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.

Google Scholar

Syaban, I., Mewengkang, N. N., and Golung, A. (2018). Peranan Penggunaan Website Sebagai Media Informasi Dinas Pariwisata Kabupaten Halmahera Utara. Acta Diurna Komunikasi 7:1–11.

Google Scholar

Verma, R. K., Kumar, S., and Ilavarasan, P. V. (2017). Government portals, social media platforms and citizen engagement in India: Some insights. Proc Compu Sci. 122, 842–849. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.11.445

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Vossen, G., Schönthaler, F., and Dillon, S. (2017). The Web at graduation and beyond Business impacts and developments. Springer International Publishing. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-60161-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Wijoyo, S., and Redi, A. (2021). Gender-based crime surges: Komnas Perempuan receives over 25,000 cases, 33% involving sexual violence. UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

Google Scholar

Wijoyo, S., and Redi, A. (2024). “Case report: forensic examination in sexual violence cases.” Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Law, Social Sciences, Economics, and Education.

Google Scholar

Zhang, L., and Nie, Z. (2025). Designing civic interaction with AI in government websites: a public-oriented framework. arXiv. 20–33. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2501.10715

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar