TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsHow Indonesia and Singapore handle information pressure
From election debates to AI‑manipulated content, audiences in both countries rely on legacy media for credibility during high-stakes moments while increasingly consuming politics through fast, visual and creator-driven formats.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Illustration of social media apps in a smartphone menu (Shutterstock/MIchele Ursi)
T
rust in news continues to slide globally, yet when elections arrive, audiences in Indonesia and Singapore behave differently. New evidence from both countries shows that even in a fragmented, creator-driven information ecosystem, voters still return to legacy media for credibility and reassurance.
The latest Reuters Institute Digital News Report highlights a familiar trend: Social media and video platforms have, on average, overtaken news websites and apps across markets, while global trust in news has fallen to 37 percent, the lowest level since 2015.
A Eurobarometer survey across 27 EU states similarly found that two in three users seek political information on social media and more than one-third follow influencers.
These patterns raise a critical question: Do people rely on different information sources when the stakes are high? Studies conducted during the 2024 Indonesian presidential election and the 2025 Singapore general election suggest they do.
In Indonesia, a nationally representative two-wave panel survey found that television remained the most accessed source of election news, followed by WhatsApp and face-to-face conversations. YouTube, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram have grown rapidly, but they have not displaced TV’s central role. Print media has nearly vanished, with almost nine in 10 respondents saying they never accessed it.
Trust patterns mirror usage. Indonesians placed the greatest trust in TV and interpersonal conversations, not social media. During high-stakes moments, voters seek not only speed but facts, familiarity and accountability.
Singapore showed a similar pattern despite its more digitally saturated environment. During the 2025 general election, digital versions of legacy outlets such as CNA (Channel News Asia), The Straits Times and Lianhe Zaobao were among the most used and trusted sources. Television remained the second-most trusted medium across demographics. Print continues to decline, but the institutions behind it retain influence through digital migration.
Across both countries, the evidence is clear: Legacy media has not disappeared; it has moved online. When voters need clarity, they turn to brands associated with editorial credibility. Legacy media now competes in a transformed attention economy. Short-form video, creator commentary and podcasts have become central to political communication, especially among younger voters.
In Indonesia, voters aged 15-24 consumed election content primarily through TikTok, WhatsApp, TV, Instagram and YouTube. Podcasts and influencers were key sources of political commentary.
Singapore’s voters showed similar behavior: TikTok and YouTube were major platforms for younger voters, and nearly one-third of all voters consumed podcasts daily during election time.
This shift has consequences. A policy proposal becomes a slogan; a debate becomes a few viral seconds; a candidate is remembered for a meme rather than a platform. Indonesia’s election survey captured this dynamic: Around half watched the presidential debates in full, but 60 percent watched only post-debate clips, which significantly shaped perceptions of candidates.
Short-form content is not inherently harmful, but its emphasis on emotion and speed often comes at the expense of nuance. As politics becomes “snackable”, societies must ask how to preserve meaningful civic discussion.
Digital literacy efforts must therefore expand beyond spotting fake news. Civic and political literacy — understanding how policies affect daily life, how governance works and how framing shapes meaning — is increasingly essential.
AI-generated content is adding new layers to election communication. In Indonesia, artificial intelligence was used to create satire, engagement-driven content and the viral “Gemoy” (cute) cartoons linked to the Prabowo-Gibran campaign. These materials were not outright disinformation but subtle propaganda, which is harder to regulate.
Exposure to deepfakes was limited, but belief in them followed partisan lines. Young and educated voters reported the highest exposure to misinformation, as well as the highest awareness of it.
Singapore’s electorate showed caution toward digitally manipulated content. Around one-third “sometimes” or “very often” encountered AI-manipulated material, though most rarely did. Concern about AI misuse remained high across age and education groups.
The two countries diverge sharply on regulation. Singapore has adopted a proactive stance, passing the Elections (Integrity of Online Advertising) (Amendment) Act in 2024 to counter digitally manipulated content.
Indonesia, by contrast, faces legal gaps. Nearly half of Indonesian respondents were unaware of video editing software, making them more vulnerable to manipulation. The Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) Law and Election Law do not regulate generative AI use in elections. A court ruling in January 2025, after the election, prohibited excessive alteration of candidate images.
Regulation alone cannot solve information manipulation, but it clarifies accountability and deters abuse. As technology accelerates, anticipatory regulatory frameworks are increasingly necessary, not just ex-post measures.
In an environment defined by fragmentation, speed and manipulation, the challenge is not to resist change but to adapt without losing depth and accuracy.
The lesson from Indonesia and Singapore is clear: When democracy is at stake, audiences still turn to credible institutions. Sustaining that trust requires adaptable journalism, deeper civic literacy and smarter regulation, so that voters can navigate high-stakes moments with clarity rather than confusion.
---
Carol Soon is associate professor and deputy head of the Communications and New Media Department at the National University of Singapore (NUS). Maria Monica Wihardja is a fellow and co-coordinator of the Media, Technology and Society Programme at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institut and adjunct assistant professor of Southeast Asian Studies at NUS. This article is republished under a Creative Commons license.
