@misc{9246547,
  abstract     = {{When nationwide protests erupted across Indonesia in August–September 2025 triggered by parliamentary pay rises and the death of a civilian under a police vehicle, the Indonesian government faced one of the most visible legitimacy challenges of the post-Reformasi era. Drawing on Suchman's (1995) typology of pragmatic, moral, and cognitive legitimacy and Weber's account of legitimacy as the foundation of political authority, this thesis examines how governmental legitimacy was communicated across two corpora: 66 government communication documents and 30 news articles from Kompas, CNN Indonesia, and tvOne, analysed through qualitative document analysis and theory-guided legitimacy coding. 

The findings show that moral legitimacy was the dominant legitimacy form across both corpora. In government communication, it was asserted through public apology, accountability proceedings, and acknowledgment of harm, supported by pragmatic legitimacy through policy concessions and civil society dialogue. Cognitive legitimacy was the weakest pattern in both corpora. In news discourse, legitimacy became more evaluative and contested, with journalistic narration and selective emphasis shaping how government legitimacy claims were communicated and interpreted. 

The thesis argues that legitimacy in political crisis communication should be understood not only as strategic reputation management, but also as a contested communicative process shaped by political context and mediated public discourse. The study contributes to crisis communication scholarship by extending legitimacy analysis into a non-Western political context and by examining legitimacy across both government and news discourse.}},
  author       = {{Mentariningrum, Ezza and Aurelia, Putri Febriana}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{When the State Must Justify Itself: Legitimacy in Indonesian Government Crisis Communication and News Discourse}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}