Public Relations Strategy of the Agency for Pancasila Ideology Development of the Republic of Indonesia in Optimizing the Dissemination of Pancasila Values through Government Digital Media
Keywords:
Communication Strategy; Government Public Relations; Agency for Pancasila Ideology Development; Digital Media; RACE Model.Abstract
Digital transformation has shifted government public communication into digital channels while simultaneously placing Pancasila ideology development in a new challenge, namely how to keep national values relevant in a fast-paced, interactive space that is vulnerable to misinformation. This study aims to analyze the Public Relations strategy of the Bureau of Public Relations of the Agency for Pancasila Ideology Development (BPIP) of the Republic of Indonesia in optimizing the dissemination of Pancasila values through government digital media, as well as to identify its supporting and inhibiting factors. The study uses a qualitative approach with a descriptive-analytical design that combines deductive and inductive dimensions. The RACE model (Research–Action–Communication–Evaluation) by Cutlip, Center, and Broom (2006) is used as the main analytical framework, strengthened by Mergel’s (2013) Three Tactics of Government Social Media Adoption and Rocha’s (2014) Three-Dimensional Model of Government Website Evaluation. Data were collected through in-depth interviews with eleven informants from three groups, digital observation of Instagram @bpipri and the bpip.go.id website, and document analysis, then analyzed using source and method triangulation. The results show that the implementation of RACE is asymmetrical; the Action dimension is the most institutionalized, while Research reveals systemic gaps in audience data collection that are passive-reactive and Jakarta-centric. An event-centric paradox was also found (40–50% of content remains ceremonial), alongside a strategic strength in human-based storytelling, evidenced by Paskibraka 2025 content with an average of 19,205 likes per post and total interactions exceeding 710 million in August 2025. The main supporting factors include leadership commitment, partnerships with professional consultants, networks of Paskibraka communities and Pancasila Ambassadors, and data analytics infrastructure. The main inhibiting factors are the incompatibility between bureaucratic procedures and social media logic, limited digital communication human resources, and the absence of formal SOPs. The study recommends the formulation of digital communication SOPs, fast-track approval mechanisms, a shift in content patterns from event-centric to presence-centric approaches, and strengthening audience research through periodic active surveys.
References
Anggoro, M. L. (2000). Teori dan Profesi Kehumasan, Serta Aplikasinya di Indonesia. Bumi Aksara.
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (APJII). (2015). Profil Pengguna Internet Indonesia 2014. Jakarta: APJII. (Cetakan pertama, Maret 2015; ISBN 978-602-19596-1-9). Diakses 8 Februari 2026, dari https://www.slideshare.net/internetsehat/profil-pengguna-internet-indonesia-2014-riset-oleh-apjii-dan-puskakom-ui
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (APJII). (2024, 7 Februari). APJII: Jumlah pengguna internet Indonesia tembus 221 juta orang (Hasil Survei Penetrasi Internet Indonesia 2024). APJII. Diakses 8 Februari 2026, dari https://apjii.or.id/berita/d/apjii-jumlah-pengguna-internet-indonesia-tembus-221-juta-orang
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Arah Kebijakan dan Peta Jalan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila 2025–2029. BPIP.
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Laporan Analisis Media Massa BPIP Periode Januari–Desember 2025. BPIP.
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Laporan Analisis Media Sosial BPIP Periode Januari–Desember 2025. BPIP.
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Penyegaran Strategi Konten Instagram BPIP RI: Menuju Komunikasi Nilai Pancasila yang Lebih Relevan dan Berdampak [Dokumen Strategi Internal]. BPIP–Spora Communication.
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Refleksi BPIP: Video Capaian BPIP 2025 [Naskah Video]. Bagian Humas BPIP.
Badan Pembinaan Ideologi Pancasila. (2025). Rencana Strategis BPIP 2025–2029. BPIP.
Bauhr, M., & Grimes, M. (2014). Indignation or resignation: The implications of transparency for societal accountability. Governance, 27(2), 291–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12033
Beetham, D. (2013). The Legitimation of Power (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Anchor Books.
Canel, M. J., & Sanders, K. (2012). Government communication: An emerging field in political communication research. In H. A. Semetko & M. Scammell (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Political Communication (pp. 85–96). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W. (2016). Research Design: Pendekatan Metode Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan Campuran (Edisi ke-4). (A. Fawaid & R. K. Pancasari, Penerj.). Pustaka Pelajar. (Karya asli diterbitkan 2014).
Criado, J. I., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2013). Government innovation through social media. Government Information Quarterly, 30(4), 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2013.10.003
Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (2006). Effective Public Relations (10th ed.). Pearson Education.
Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M., ... & Wamba, S. F. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66, 102542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542
Gong, Z., & Yang, K. (2021). Assessing government social media communication effectiveness: Evidence from China. Government Information Quarterly, 38(4), 101613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101613
Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. MIT Press.
Kent, M. L., & Taylor, M. (2002). Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public Relations Review, 28(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(02)00108-X
Kriyantono, R. (2018). Public Relations, Issue & Crisis Management: Pendekatan Critical Public Relations, Etnografi Kritis & Kualitatif. Prenada Media.
Latif, Y. (2011). Negara Paripurna: Historisitas, Rasionalitas, dan Aktualitas Pancasila. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Macnamara, J. (2016). Organizational Listening: The Missing Essential in Public Communication. Peter Lang.
Macnamara, J. (2019). Explicating listening in organization–public communication: Theory, practices, technologies. International Journal of Communication, 13, 5183–5204.
Mayfield, A. (2007). What is Social Media? iCrossing. https://www.icrossing.com/uk/sites/default/files_uk/insight_pdf_files/What%20is%20Social%20Media_iCrossing_ebook.pdf











