DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/southsight.202631682

Understanding Audience Engagement: A Qualitative Study of User Responses to the #kaburajadulu Campaign on TikTok

*Reyvani Alika Riksa  -  Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Received: 7 Jan 2026; Published: 31 Mar 2026.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 Reyvani Alika Riksa
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

This study examines o how audiences engage with and respond to the #kaburajadulu digital campaign on TikTok, an organic social media campaign among Indonesian youth expressing dissatisfaction with socio-economic conditions in Indonesia. This research employs a qualitative comment analysis approach, in which this research analyzed 500 purposively selected comments from 1,347 accessible comments on a highly engaged TikTok video associated with the campaign. Comments were classified into three analytical dimensions: perception, emotional engagement, and judgmental evaluation, with positive and negative sentiments identified across each category. Findings reveal that negative sentiments dominate (62.2%), with judgmental evaluations accounting for the majority of responses (60.0%). Audience comments reflect frustration over limited employment opportunities, rising living costs, and dissatisfaction with domestic socio-economic conditions, alongside aspirations for better lives abroad. Drawing on participatory culture theory, collective action theory, and public opinion theory, this study demonstrates that the TikTok comment section functions as a participatory digital space where users collectively express public opinion, construct shared meanings, and negotiate socio-political issues. This research contributes to digital communication studies by illustrating how viral social media campaigns serve as platforms for emotional expression and public discourse formation among Indonesian youth.

Fulltext Email colleagues
Keywords: audience engagement; TikTok; digital campaign; #kaburajadulu; digital communication

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Research Article
Language : EN
  1. Abidin, C. (2021). Mapping Internet celebrity on TikTok: Exploring attention economies and visibility labours. Cultural Science Journal, 12(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.5334/csci.140
  2. Alharahsheh, H., & Pius, A. (2019). A Review of Key Paradigms: Positivism vs Interpretivism
  3. Adrian (2025). Alasan #KaburAjaDulu Picu Brain drain. (n.d.). Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta. https://www.ums.ac.id/berita/teropong-jagat/alasan-kabur-aja-dulu-picu-brain-drain
  4. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge University Press
  5. Blevins, J., Lee, S., & Gilbert, S. (2019). Everyday activism in digital spaces: Youth participation on social media platforms
  6. Boberg, S., Quandt, T., Schatto-Eckrodt, T., & Frischlich, L. (2020). Pandemic populism and the corona crisis: A comment analysis on YouTube. Media and Communication, 8(2), 475–478. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v8i2.2985
  7. Boulianne, S. (2019). Revolution in the making? Social media effects on political participation. Information, Communication & Society, 22(1), 39–54
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  9. Burgess, J., Poell, T., & Marwick, A. E. (2017). The SAGE Handbook of Social Media
  10. Castells, M. (2012). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the internet age. Polity Press
  11. Carpentier, N. (2011). Media and participation: A site of ideological-democratic struggle. Intellect
  12. DataReportal. (2024). Digital 2024: Indonesia. We Are Social & Meltwater
  13. https://www.datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-indonesia
  14. Drouin, M., McDaniel, B. T., Pater, J., & Toscos, T. (2020). How parents and teens use technology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 2, 100023
  15. Ekman, P. (1992). An Argument for Basic Emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3–4), 169–200
  16. Fay, B. (1996). Contemporary Philosophy of Social Science: A Multicultural Approach. Wiley-Blackwell
  17. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York University Press
  18. Jenkins, H., et al. (2009). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture
  19. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press
  20. Hendrickx, J. (2024). ‘Normal News Is Boring’: How Young Adults Encounter and Experience News on Instagram and TikTok. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241255955
  21. Hennink, M., Hutter, I., & Bailey, A. (2020). Qualitative Research Methods
  22. Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2016). Instagrammatics and Digital Methods: Studying Visual Social Media, from Selfies and GIFs to Memes and Emoji. Communication Research and Practice, 2(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1155332
  23. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
  24. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media
  25. Keller, J., & Kall, L. (2023). Presence in digital spaces: A phenomenological perspective. Media and Communication, 11(3), 104–116
  26. Literat, I., et al. (2018). How youth personalize political participation on social media
  27. Literat, I., & Kligler-Vilenchik, N. (2019). Youth Collective Political Expression on Social Media: The Role of Affordances and Memetic Dimensions for Voicing Political Views. New Media & Society, 21(9), 1988–2009. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819837571
  28. Li, J., Ma, W., & Chan, M. (2021). “Online political expression on TikTok: Exploring youth engagement through short-video sharing.” Journal of Youth Studies, 24(8), 1034–1052
  29. McAdams, D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stories. Review of General Psychology, 5(2), 100–122
  30. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications
  31. Naqvi, S. Z. R. (2025). The rapid growth of digital communication and social media’s influence on language. Social Science Review Archives, 3(1), 1672–1686. https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v3i1.473
  32. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S., Robertson, C. T., & Nielsen, R. K. (2023). Digital News Report 2023. Reuters Institute
  33. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1974). The Spiral of Silence: A Theory of Public Opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/1466984
  34. Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press
  35. Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press
  36. Papacharissi, Z. (2016). Affective publics and structures of storytelling: sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society, 19(3), 307–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1109697
  37. Plutchik, R. (2001). The nature of emotions. American Scientist, 89(4), 344
  38. Putri, R., & Hidayat, A. (2024). Satire and social commentary in Indonesian TikTok content
  39. Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications
  40. Schellewald, A. (2023). Understanding the Popularity and Affordances of TikTok Through User Experiences. Media, Culture & Society, 45(8), 1568–1582. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221144562
  41. Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructionism. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 189–213). Sage Publications
  42. Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012). How does brand-related user-generated content differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Business Horizons, 55(3), 241–251
  43. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217
  44. Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the philosophical underpinnings of research: Ontology and epistemology. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n9p9
  45. Spink, M. J. (2004). Linguistic constructionism and the production of social realities. Papers on Social Representations, 13(1), 1–17
  46. Swart, J. (2021). Tactics of News Literacy: How Young People Access, Evaluate, and Engage With News on Social Media. New Media & Society, 25(3), 505–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211011447
  47. TikTok Statistics. (2021). TikTok App Downloads & Revenue Statistics. Business of Apps
  48. Van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504
  49. Vivienne, S., & Burgess, J. (2012). The digital storyteller as everyday activist. Continuum, 26(3), 315–331
  50. Vogels, E. A., Auxier, B., Rainie, L., & Anderson, M. (2022). Teens, Social Media and Technology 2022. Pew Research Center
  51. Zeng, J., & Abidin, C. (2021). ‘#OkBoomer, time to meet the Zoomers’: Studying the Memefication of Intergenerational Politics on TikTok. Information, Communication & Society, 24(16), 2459–2481. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1961007

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.