Citizen journalism is the process of producing information that ordinary citizens do for events that occur around them in various media. Although it looks egalitarian and inclusive, in reality, the practice of citizen journalism is lame and discriminatory. This article shows the beginnings of the journey of citizen journalism and what things are behind it. This study aims to provide an alternative view of the initial presence of citizen journalism, both in the world and in Indonesia. Data were obtained through interviews with stakeholders who understood the early history of citizen journalism, observation, documents, and literature. Citizen journalism is a long-standing practice, even older as journalism itself. Citizen journalism arises because of criticism professional journalism which is in favor of certain political interests and is too market-oriented; the development of internet technology; situations where professional journalism from its inception cannot be separated from citizens; and the profit motive. Behind it all, the big interests that imagine it are journalism itself (professional journalism), democracy (freedom of expression and opinion), and markets. All three are interrelated in motivating the presence of citizen journalism.

Dubbed as the ‘ring of fire,’, Indonesian territories have witnessed many forms of natural disasters such as volcano eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis, which had been widely reported in the mass media. While the media has reported the scale of destruction and number of casualties caused by those disasters, they have also narrated dramatic recounts of the survivors. Imbued with spectacular imagery, the media seek to appeal to the audiences emotionally and evoke sentiments of solidarity as well as humanitarian actions. Employing a textual analysis of media reports in Indonesia, particularly from the weekly news magazine Tempo, this study explores the way in which the media frame the narratives of the survivors of natural disasters (volcano eruptions, earthquakes and tsunamis) across Indonesia. Although the media are expected to report events objectively, this study demonstrates the affective element in the practice of journalism on natural disasters. Therefore, this study will contribute to the growing research on the relationship between media and disasters, particularly in the context of a disaster-prone country such as Indonesia. In particular, it will contribute to the body of journalism research which looks at the role of narrating the human subject in tragic events such as natural disasters.

This paper has shown how the relationship between state and civil society in Indonesia is part of the problem of building democratic government. The problems in Indonesian society is the polycentric nature, by which civil society organisations or popular organisations are being fragmanted and often unorganised. This has made it increasingly difficult to transform various conflicts into more political through democratic institution. At least there are four major problems:The first problem is when a strong civil society faces an ineffective state tactic of governmentality. This tends to stimulate civil society resistance and conflict; or it fosters coexistence through alternative governmentality techniques where the relationship between the state and society is in conflict. The second problem is when a weak civil society faces and effective state. This tends to trigger practices of money politics which are embedded in patronage and clientelism. The third problem can be found in the situation where weak civil society faces an ineffective state which tends to stimulate the emergence of extralegal governmentality practiced by thugs, militia, vigilantes, and paramilitaries. The fourth problem is reflected in the situation where a strong civil society faces an effective state.

Keterlibatan warga dalam menyampaikan informasi yang luput dilakukan oleh jurnalis profesional  masih bisa kita lihat hingga kini. Terutama pada peristiwa-peristiwa bencana alam seperti gempa dan tsunami yang melanda Palu dan Donggala pada akhir September 2018. Hal ini menunjukkan praktik jurnalisme warga masih mungkin dijalankan. Hanya saja, di ranah akedemis, riset jurnalisme warga di Indonesia tidak terlalu variatif dan terkesan berjalan di tempat, didominasi pembicaraan sejauh mana peran dan efektivitasnya berdasarkan model-model tertentu. Situasi ini sebaiknya diatasi. Salah satunya dengan menghadirkan cara berpikir cultural studies dalam mengkaji isu-isu jurnalisme warga. Cultural studies atau kajian budaya adalah kajian kritis yang mampu membantu periset menyelami beragam hal, yakni representasi, regulasi, identitas, konsumsi, dan produksi di mana masing-masing bisa saling terkait satu sama lain. Masalah lain yang saya temukan adalah pemahaman jurnalisme warga, yang selama ini berkembang  perlu dikritisi karena tidak kontekstual dan cenderung asal klaim. Saya beranggapan jurnalisme warga adalah praktik yang timpang, eksklusif, elitis, dan diskriminatif. Keberadaaannya menjadi liyan bagi jurnalisme dominan. Artikel ini juga merupakan autokritik atas pemahaman saya soal jurnalisme warga dalam riset saya sebelumnya. Kata kunci: jurnalisme warga, kajian budaya, keberagaman informasi, demokrasi, distingsi

No abstract