On August 31, 2025, a poignant message from Sri Mulyani, Indonesia’s Minister of Finance, struck a chord with the nation. In the wake of a distressing incident where her home was looted, she took to Instagram to share her thoughts, declaring, “Never stop loving Indonesia.”
This heartfelt sentiment resonated deeply with many, rapidly garnering support and going viral across social media platforms. Unlike other politicians who have faced backlash over extravagant lifestyles, Sri Mulyani became the target of malicious misinformation, with false claims circulating that she referred to teachers as a burden to the country.
In this digital age, social media serves as a double-edged sword, capable of disseminating information with lightning speed while simultaneously rallying the public against corrupt officials. It harbors the potential to enhance democratic engagement but poses significant risks when used carelessly, often unintentionally breeding misinformation and confusion.
Navigating Opportunities and Challenges
The advent of digital technology has radically altered the landscape of information, profoundly influencing psychology and behavior. This cultural shift has permeated every aspect of life (Boehme-Neßler, 2020), leaving an indelible mark on democratic politics. This evolution has birthed the concept of e-democracy, characterized as “participation in the online world, including involvement in communities, campaigns, and virtual advocacy” (Gillian Youngs, 2007). Today, citizens in the digital realm, commonly referred to as netizens, play a pivotal role in shaping this new democratic paradigm.
Digital democracy holds tantalizing prospects for the 21st century. For governments to maintain their relevance, they must adeptly leverage digital tools to enhance the effectiveness of democratic processes (N. Vittal, 2001). In Indonesia, the power of netizens has become increasingly evident; movements such as the protests ignited by the #Indonesiagelap hashtag in February 2025 and the current mass picketing saw thousands taking to the streets, demanding accountability from their leaders. These coordinated efforts, fueled by social media, signal a transformative shift in the nature of activism (Saud, 2021).
However, alongside these opportunities lie significant challenges. The specter of disinformation looms large, as echo chambers proliferate, magnifying divisiveness (van Herpen, 2021). While digital platforms can invigorate democracy, they can also serve as breeding grounds for falsehoods (Hui, 2020). Influential elites often deploy cybertroops to counteract grassroots online movements, fabricating narratives that sow discord and chaos (Johansson, 2016). Furthermore, the phenomenon of “clickism” raises concerns that mere online engagement can overshadow genuine and impactful activism.
A critical issue within the realm of e-democracy is the manipulation of social media by automated accounts, or social bots, designed to simulate human interaction. These deceptive entities may dilute authentic engagement by generating false personas and promoting misleading content, ultimately undermining the pillars of transparency and accountability (Oren Perez, 2020). Their influence has been particularly pernicious during major elections worldwide, notably in Indonesia, where gubernatorial and presidential races have been dramatically affected.
Success in e-democracy cannot be assumed simply through the adoption of social media; rather, it underscores the urgent necessity for digital literacy, critical thinking skills, and conducive environments that promote meaningful engagement (Suwana, 2018; Ilham & Pawane, 2025). For Indonesians, the road ahead involves a concerted effort to bolster digital literacy, enabling citizens to employ technology within the democratic sphere effectively.
Charting a Path Forward
To harness the potential of social media responsibly, Amy Chapman’s recommendation to integrate critical digital citizenship into educational curricula is worth considering (Chapman, 2022). First, it is essential to dispel the stereotype that young individuals are simply “digital natives.” They require targeted instruction on navigating technology, including awareness of phishing scams and online safety measures.
Second, we must illuminate the intricacies of social media manipulation and the inherent design flaws within platforms. Their algorithms often create “echo chambers,” severely restricting exposure to diverse perspectives and entrenching societal marginalization.
Third, cultivating media literacy is paramount. Civic education must equip students with the ability to seek out, critically evaluate, and discern bias in information, particularly as spread through social media vehicles.
Fourth, fostering critical digital citizenship entails scrutinizing the underlying power structures that govern digital platforms, empowering youth not only to recognize injustice but also to challenge it in their communities actively.
Fifth, it is crucial to address political polarization by including discussions on controversial subjects in civic education, thereby linking students’ personal experiences to current, relevant events. Lastly, we must prioritize student privacy, establishing clear boundaries to protect their well-being in the digital landscape, especially as they engage with social media in academic settings.
Investing in digital literacy not only cultivates essential skills among students but also nurtures their agency, paving the way for a brighter, more informed future. By emphasizing the principles of critical digital citizenship, we can ensure that e-democracy evolves into a robust and meaningful form of civic engagement, steering clear of the pitfalls associated with “e-democrazy.”