Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

The Algorithmic Gaze: Deconstructing Authorship and Aesthetics in Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Art Hesti Putri; Dais Susilo; Ervin Munandar; Hanifah Yasin; Idris Atmaja
Enigma in Cultural Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): Enigma in Cultural
Publisher : Enigma Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61996/cultural.v3i1.106

The proliferation of advanced text-to-image generative AI represents a paradigmatic shift in visual culture. It instigates a profound crisis for established concepts of authorship and aesthetics while also raising critical questions about artistic labor and the political economy of cultural production. This study investigates the complex negotiations between human creators and algorithmic systems. This study employed a qualitative, multi-modal methodology. A visual semiotic analysis was conducted on a curated corpus of 300 artworks from Midjourney, DALL-E 3, and Stable Diffusion, sampled to mitigate platform-specific biases. This was triangulated with a thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 15 artists and designers actively using these tools. The methodological limitations, specifically the sample's "adopter-centric" bias, are explicitly acknowledged. The visual analysis identified a distinct "algorithmic gaze" characterized by hyper-compositing, surreal corporeal logic, and stylistic convergence, reflecting both the system's non-human perspective and the biases of its training data. The thematic analysis of artist interviews revealed three dominant experiential themes: the artist's role being reframed as curatorial, the creative process as a form of dialogue, and the interaction as an exploration of the system's "latent space". These participant narratives often frame the interaction in terms of empowerment and collaboration. In conclusion, generative AI reconfigures authorship into a distributed network phenomenon. However, this study argues that this posthuman collaboration occurs within a system structured by significant power asymmetries. The aesthetics of the algorithmic gaze are not neutral but are shaped by the commercial and ideological imperatives of the platforms. The artist's experience of empowerment coexists with broader material processes of deskilling, alienation, and the centralization of cultural production. Understanding this new paradigm requires a critical synthesis of posthumanist theory and political economy.

Forging the ‘New Opposition’: Resilience, Strategy, and Digital Contention in Post-Election Indonesian Civil Society Alex Putra Pratama; Christian Napitupulu; Dais Susilo
Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 8 No. 4 (2025): Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/oaijss.v8i4.292

In the wake of recent elections, Indonesia’s political landscape has seen a consolidation of power and the co-optation of formal opposition parties, creating a vacuum in democratic accountability. This study investigates the emergence of a ‘New Opposition’—a constellation of civil society coalitions that have assumed the role of a critical check on state power. We examine the strategies these coalitions employ, their internal dynamics, and the mechanisms underpinning their resilience in an increasingly restrictive political environment. This research employed a 12-month ethnographic mixed-methods approach from May 2024 to May 2025. We conducted 35 in-depth interviews with activists, lawyers, and academics; participant observation within a major civil society coalition in Jakarta; and three focus group discussions. This qualitative data was triangulated with quantitative analysis, including a Social Network Analysis (SNA) of 45 organizations to map collaborative structures and a survey (n=150) of activists to gauge perceived strategic effectiveness. Our findings reveal a strategic repertoire that blends legal-constitutional challenges, sophisticated public narrative framing, and digitally-enabled mobilization. SNA results demonstrate a significant increase in network density (from 0.21 to 0.45) and centralization following key political triggers, indicating a rapid consolidation of the coalition. Key ‘broker’ organizations, particularly in the legal aid and digital rights sectors, were crucial for connecting disparate clusters. While digital platforms were vital for mobilization, they also exposed activists to significant risks, including doxxing and state-sponsored cyber-attacks, creating a paradox of visibility and vulnerability. In conclusion, Indonesian civil society coalitions have effectively transformed into a resilient ‘New Opposition,’ characterized by adaptive strategies and a robust, networked structure. They function as a crucial bulwark for democratic norms, operating outside formal political structures. Their resilience is derived not from a single strategy but from the synergistic interplay of legal, narrative, and digital contention, sustained by a dense network of trust and shared purpose. This study underscores the critical role of networked civil society in upholding democratic accountability in hybrid regimes.

Forging the ‘New Opposition’: Resilience, Strategy, and Digital Contention in Post-Election Indonesian Civil Society Alex Putra Pratama; Christian Napitupulu; Dais Susilo
Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 8 No. 4 (2025): Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/oaijss.v8i4.292

In the wake of recent elections, Indonesia’s political landscape has seen a consolidation of power and the co-optation of formal opposition parties, creating a vacuum in democratic accountability. This study investigates the emergence of a ‘New Opposition’—a constellation of civil society coalitions that have assumed the role of a critical check on state power. We examine the strategies these coalitions employ, their internal dynamics, and the mechanisms underpinning their resilience in an increasingly restrictive political environment. This research employed a 12-month ethnographic mixed-methods approach from May 2024 to May 2025. We conducted 35 in-depth interviews with activists, lawyers, and academics; participant observation within a major civil society coalition in Jakarta; and three focus group discussions. This qualitative data was triangulated with quantitative analysis, including a Social Network Analysis (SNA) of 45 organizations to map collaborative structures and a survey (n=150) of activists to gauge perceived strategic effectiveness. Our findings reveal a strategic repertoire that blends legal-constitutional challenges, sophisticated public narrative framing, and digitally-enabled mobilization. SNA results demonstrate a significant increase in network density (from 0.21 to 0.45) and centralization following key political triggers, indicating a rapid consolidation of the coalition. Key ‘broker’ organizations, particularly in the legal aid and digital rights sectors, were crucial for connecting disparate clusters. While digital platforms were vital for mobilization, they also exposed activists to significant risks, including doxxing and state-sponsored cyber-attacks, creating a paradox of visibility and vulnerability. In conclusion, Indonesian civil society coalitions have effectively transformed into a resilient ‘New Opposition,’ characterized by adaptive strategies and a robust, networked structure. They function as a crucial bulwark for democratic norms, operating outside formal political structures. Their resilience is derived not from a single strategy but from the synergistic interplay of legal, narrative, and digital contention, sustained by a dense network of trust and shared purpose. This study underscores the critical role of networked civil society in upholding democratic accountability in hybrid regimes.

Institutional Publication Pressure and Perceived Epistemic Injustice: Mediating Roles of Cost Privatization and Research Cannibalization in Indonesia Ahmad Erza; Dais Susilo; Gladys Putri
Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 9 No. 3 (2026): Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences
Publisher : HM Publisher in collaboration with CMHC Research Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/oaijss.v9i3.328

Background: The article-processing-charge model has reorganized the political economy of knowledge production, while researcher-level perceptions of fairness remain under-measured in the Global South. Objective: To test whether institutional publication pressure predicts perceived epistemic injustice and whether publication-cost privatization and research cannibalization mediate that relationship among Indonesian academics. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 312 academics used validated multi-item scales, multiple regression, parallel mediation with 5,000 bootstrap samples, moderation, common-method testing, and multicollinearity diagnostics. Results: Publication pressure, cost privatization, and research cannibalization independently predicted epistemic injustice, explaining 34.6% of variance. Both mediators carried significant indirect effects, and perceived grant availability buffered the pressure-to-privatization path. Conclusion: Publication mandates without adequate funding may generate perceived epistemic injustice; the findings formalize the 'illusion of inclusivity' as a measurable perception.

Institutional Publication Pressure and Perceived Epistemic Injustice: Mediating Roles of Cost Privatization and Research Cannibalization in Indonesia Ahmad Erza; Dais Susilo; Gladys Putri
Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 9 No. 3 (2026): Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences
Publisher : HM Publisher in collaboration with CMHC Research Center

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/oaijss.v9i3.328

Background: The article-processing-charge model has reorganized the political economy of knowledge production, while researcher-level perceptions of fairness remain under-measured in the Global South. Objective: To test whether institutional publication pressure predicts perceived epistemic injustice and whether publication-cost privatization and research cannibalization mediate that relationship among Indonesian academics. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 312 academics used validated multi-item scales, multiple regression, parallel mediation with 5,000 bootstrap samples, moderation, common-method testing, and multicollinearity diagnostics. Results: Publication pressure, cost privatization, and research cannibalization independently predicted epistemic injustice, explaining 34.6% of variance. Both mediators carried significant indirect effects, and perceived grant availability buffered the pressure-to-privatization path. Conclusion: Publication mandates without adequate funding may generate perceived epistemic injustice; the findings formalize the 'illusion of inclusivity' as a measurable perception.

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 5 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 5 Documents
Search