ANALYSIS OF THE FRAMING OF NEWS COVERAGE OF FOOD POISONING CASES IN THE MBG PROGRAM IN PIKIRAN RAKYAT AND TRIBUN JABAR

Abstract

The motivation of this study comes from media reports of a food poisoning incident in the Free Nutritious Meals Program (MBG), which generated different constructions of reality in the online media. This study is aimed at analyzing the framing of this incident by both the Pikiran Rakyat and Tribun Jabar and to find the differences in the framing of this incident between Pikiran Rakyat and Tribun Jabar and to explain the implications of the differences in the framing of this incident between Pikiran Rakyat and Tribun Jabar on the public perception of government policy. The study is qualitative, based on the model of framing analysis (problem definition, cause identification, moral judgment, and recommendation for solution) of Robert Entman. Data gathering was conducted by analyzing news texts and as supplementary data by conducting interviews. The findings indicate that Pikiran Rakyat usually presents a case of implementation problem of the program, which can be fixed by administrative evaluation, while Tribun Jabar usually presents a case more critically, by highlighting the elements of policy responsibility and accountability. These differences in framing can be important for the public, as more critical framing can lead to skepticism about the program, while more moderate framing can help to keep audiences motivated in the program's goals. This study shows that the media is an agent of construction of reality in forming public opinion on social policies of the government.