Djayadi Hanan LSI: Rating Turun 30 Persen, Pemerintah mestinya Merangkul Kritik Warga

JAKARTA - The Executive Director of the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) Djayadi Hanan assessed that the decline in public satisfaction ratings with President Prabowo Subianto's government performance, one of which was due to poor political communication to the public.

"There are three negative things that explain why the level of satisfaction with the President has decreased quite sharply. First is the macro condition, whether it's the economy, law enforcement, politics, and security. Second is about policy, and third is about communication," said Djayadi when talking to Eddy Wijaya in the EdShareOn podcast which aired on Wednesday, August 11, 2026.

Based on the results of the SMRC survey, there was a decrease in the public satisfaction rating for President Prabowo's government from 81.2% in November 2025 to 51.1% in July this year. Djayadi highlighted the sharp decline in 8 months was contributed by public perceptions of government programs that were already underway.

The community is said by Djayadi to no longer assess promises, but also see the reality of the achievement of the programs that have been running. Among them is the promise of the 19.8 million job program offered by Prabowo together with his deputy, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, during the 2024 presidential campaign.

What also affects public perception of government programs is public communication, in this case policy communication and political communication in general.

"This is related to how the government responds to negative perceptions and criticism from the public," said this academic from the International Islamic University of Indonesia (UIII). If you look at it, the government, especially the President, is considered by Djayadi not to embrace criticism, or too defensive and reactive.

"So people who criticize are often immediately labeled. For example, with the label "Londo Ireng", accused of being a foreign agent, not wanting Indonesia to progress, and the like."

Ideally, said Djayadi, the government accepts criticism as a form of love for Indonesia, and a manifestation of efforts to encourage the progress of government programs. Unfortunately, the government instead gives the impression that it is in conflict with the public who gives criticism. In fact, the government should focus on the substance of the criticism. Don't let the input from the public be responded to late, like when citizens criticize the Free Nutritious Food (MBG) program.

"Imagine, the government took almost two years to accept some of the criticism about MBG, even after the arrest of its top officials (Dadan Hindayana). This shows that there is a problem in its public governance," he said.

Djayadi assessed that the President and the government leadership had actually realized this problem since a number of political communication polemics emerged. For example, when the Head of the Presidential Communication Office responded to a critical report from the media, his response actually gave birth to controversy in the public sphere.

Until finally, its structure was changed to the Communication Agency (Bakom). However, the change of the institution does not seem to have resolved the problem, but instead focuses on finding the faults of critics. This shows that the government has not been able to position itself as a container, listener, and accommodation of criticism from the public.

On the other hand, only a few of the number of officials in the government were considered by Djayadi to be able to communicate well with the public. Proof of this, said Djayadi, only a few of Prabowo's cabinet ministers are known to more than 40% of the public.

Most of the public's level of recognition of ministers, the figure is below 20%, as the Indonesian Political Indicator survey. "Government communicators should include all ministers and their representatives, who can explain the policies of their respective ministries. Communication work can be coordinated by Bakom, but it seems that this function is not running optimally," he said.

Therefore, Djayadi hopes that the government will improve its political communication with the public. The first thing that can be done is to do efficiency by weighing the difficult economic conditions.

This commitment to efficiency can be done, one of which is by streamlining the cabinet structure, which is currently very fat.

"That will be a positive trigger that shows the government's empathy with the public," said Djayadi. Second, the government needs to rearrange priority programs that swallow huge budgets. That way, Djayadi continued, the President will have solid public support.

The news of a major riot in August 2026, considered by the Executive Director of the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) Djayadi Hanan, should be handled by the government.

Moreover, the issue of the August demonstration is considered to be a fabrication or engineering to create unrest in the public space. The arustama media is even accused of being silenced to cover the mass action that occurred in a number of major cities in Indonesia.

"This goes back to the political courage of the government to deploy its state apparatus and instruments. The government has a massive intelligence structure: there is BIN, police intelligence, and also BAIS TNI," he told Eddy Wijaya in the EdShareOn podcast which aired on Wednesday, August 12, 2026.

Legal instruments such as the Electronic Information and Transaction Law or ITE Law can actually be used by the government to suppress hoaxes and narratives that cause unrest in society. However, the problem, according to Djayadi, is if the hoax is produced by certain camps in the government itself. If that is true, then the source of the disease is in the internal state.

"At this point, the prevention function of intelligence should work to detect where the narrative originated. Therefore, the actors who spread hoaxes can be dragged into the legal realm if the cyber police have found the mastermind," said Djayadi.

However, Djayadi said, this provocative narrative is widespread, it could be because the inner and economic conditions of the community are not conducive. "Hoax issues can inflame emotions because the psychological-social-economic situation of the people at the grassroots is not going well," he added. (ADV)