Fallacies and Topos in Public Critique: The Case of Gus Miftah on Twitter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30983/mj.v5i1.9538Keywords:
Social Media, fallacy and topos, Critical Discourse Analysis, public critique, twitterAbstract
This study examines the discourse surrounding Gus Miftah’s resignation as a presidential special envoy, emphasizing Twitter users’ remarks. This study focuses on how public debates and criticism toward Gus Mifath can be misleading and out of focus. This study aims to show that emotion and improper judgment can break the arguments rule in public debates. By using Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak’s theoretical framework on pragmatic fallacies and topoi and the theory of attitude in appraisal theory by Martin and White, the research identifies and analyzes argumentative strategies prevalent in public discourse. The findings reveal a significant presence of fallacies, including ad hominem which has dominant result 30.2% and ad populum 15.7% and topos of justice, disadvantage, and humanitarianism by score 10.7%, 9.7% and 9.7% from 113 data respectively can challenges power structures and result in political change. Situated within Indonesia’s socio-cultural context, the study highlights mostly those arguments fall into fallacies which means that they were fueled by emotions and misjudgment in attitude analysis found that 69.86% are about negative judgment and 13.4% negative appreciation. In addition, this research also found 45% in negative judgment and 16% in positive affect in topos. This result shows that although many comments are fueled by emotions and misjudgment, few of them still states their hope of change from Gus Miftah and the government who chose him as the presidential special envoy.
References
Ariel, C., & Eriksson, G. (2019). The making of healthy and moral snacks: A multimodal critical discourse analysis of corporate storytelling. Discourse, Context & Media, 32, 1–10.
Azwendra, W., & Putri, N. E. (2025). Teori etika Ibnu Miskawaih: Problematika keagamaan Gus Miftah dengan penjual es teh. Acintya: Jurnal Teologi, Filsafat Dan Studi Agama, 1(2), 251–264.
Bou-Franch, P., & Blitvich, P. G.-C. (2018). Analyzing digital discourse: New insights and future directions. Springer.
Boyd, D., Golder, S., & Lotan, G. (2010). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
Catalano, T., & Gatti, L. (2017). Representing teachers as criminals in the news: a multimodal critical discourse analysis of the Atlanta schools’“Cheating Scandal.” Social Semiotics, 27(1), 59–80.
Elyas, T., Al-Zhrani, K. A., Mujaddadi, A., & Almohammadi, A. (2020). The representation(s) of Saudi women pre-driving era in local newspapers and magazines: a critical discourse analysis. Britis Journal of Middle Eastern Studies.
Fadillah, M. I. R. (2023). Retorika Gus Miftah dalam dakwah pada media sosial Youtube. Tabligh: Jurnal Komunikasi Dan Penyiaran Islam, 8(1), 25–44.
Fahmi, A. R., Ranu, A., & Khoiriyah, H. D. (2025). Illocutionary acts and hate speech on Gus Miftah: Analyzing pragmatic implications in social meda discourse. KLAUSA: Kajian Linguistik, Pembelajaran Bahasa, Dan Sastra, 9(1), 82–89.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Fikriyah, D., Dewi, D. R. C., & Amri, A. (2024). Gus Miftah’s contemporary da’wah rhetoric style on the iced tea seller from communication and legal perspective: A case study. International Journal of Sustainable Law, 1(2), 85–90.
Habibah, L. M. N., & Baehaqie, I. (2025). Kajian pelanggaran prinsip kesopanan dalam ceramah Gus Miftah Maulana Habiburrahman. Artikulasi: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 5(1), 75–85.
Hassanli, N., Small, J., & Darcy, S. (2018). The representation of Airbnb in newspapers: a critical discourse analysis. Current Issues in Tourism.
Hei, Y., & van Leeuwen, T. (2020). Animation and the remediation of school physics – a social semiotic approach. Social Semiotics, 30(5), 665–684.
Jenkins, H., Ford, S., & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable media: Creating value and meaning in a networked culture. New York University Press.
Khaer, A., & Zahroh, A. (2025). Ethics of preaching in cancel culture: Analysis of Gus Miftah’s communication style. QULUBANA: Jurnal Manajemen Dakwah, 6(1), 115–129.
Kudrawi, A. H., Ikhsan, M. R., Razzaq, A., & Nugraha, M. Y. (2025). Strategi komunikasi krisis studi kasus Gus Miftah dalam menanggapi isu hinaan terhadap tukang es teh di Instagram. Komunika: Jurnal Ilmiah Komunikasi, 2(3), 45–56.
Laksono, I. S. S., Hamamah, H., & Chojimah, N. (2020). Persuasive strategy in prabowo’s political speech at national agenda 2019. Nusa: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa Dan Sastra, 15(2), 214–224.
Lestari, M. D. (2020). Maksim tutur kesantunan berbahasa dalam ceramah Gus Miftah. Universitas Islam Malang.
Martin, J. R. (2009). Discourse studies. In M. A. . Halliday & J. J. Webster (Eds.), Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics (pp. 154–165). Continuum.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Masruroh, H., & Mahmudi, A. (2025). Public communication ethics in da’wah: A case study of controversial content by KH. Miftah Maulana Habiburrahman (Gus Miftah). Busyro: Jurnal Dakwah Dan Komunikasi Islam, 6(2), 35–40.
Matamoros-Fernandez, A., & Farkas, J. (2021). Racism, hate speech, and social media: A systematic review and critique. Television & New Media, 22(2), 205–224.
Mautner, G. (2009). Check and balances: How corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publication, inc.
Nadhif, W., Romadhoni, B. K., Zuhriyah, L. F., & Purnomo, R. (2024). Pengaruh status sosial dan kekuasaan dalam komunikasi antar pribadi antara Gus Miftah dan penjual es teh. Kamaya: Jurnal Ilmu Agama, 7(4), 114–124.
Pangaribuan, M., & Saphira, D. (2025). Analisis framing pada teks editorial tentang buntut panjang olikan “goblok” Gus Miftah ke penjual es teh: Studi kasus pada media online Detik.com. Saber: Jurnal Teknik Informatika, Sains Dan Ilmu Komunikasi, 3(1), 91–96.
Pertiwi, W. R. (2023). Campur kode tuturan dalam ceramah Gus Miftah pada kanal Youtube Gus Miftah Offical. Sasindo: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 11(2), 412–419.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and antisemitism. Routledge.
Setiawan, M. A. (2024). Humor atau hina? Menilai etika komunikasi publik dalam kasus Gus Miftah dan penjual es teh. Urnal STIKOM Semarang| Semai Komunikasi, 7(2), 1–9.
Setyono, B., & Widodo, H. P. (2019). The representation of multicultural values in the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture-Endorsed EFL textbook: a critical discourse analysis. Intercultural Education, 30(4), 383–397.
Tao, Y. (2021). Who should apologise: Expressing criticism of public figures on Chinese social media in times of COVID-19. Discourse & Society, 32(5), 622–638.
Teo, P. (2019). Marketization of universities in China: A critical discourse analysis of the university president’s message. Discourse & Communication.
Tindale, C. W. (2007). Fallacies and argument appraisal. Cambridge University Press.
Townsend, L., & Wallace, C. (2017). The ethics of using social media data in research: A new framework. In K. Woodfield (Ed.), The ethics of online research (pp. 189–207). Emerald Publishing Limited.
van Dijk, T. A. (2014). Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge University Press.
Veum, A., & Undrum, L. V. M. (2017). The selfie as a global discourse. Discourse & Society, 1–18.
Walton, D. (2010). Arguments from Ignorance (2nd eds). Pennsylvania State Press.
Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 63–94). SAGE Publications, inc.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Azza Naila Suriya, Muhammad Hafiz Kurniawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
