Sociologist and Chairman of the Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Studies (PSP3) at IPB University, Dr Ivanovich Agusta, highlighted the authorities’ response to allegations that ice cream contained non food ingredients. He regretted that the information had spread widely before adequate scientific verification.
According to Dr Ivanovic, this phenomenon reveals serious problems in the management of information crises and the power relations between the state and small communities. He believes that the ease with which the public and even the authorities believe and viralize unproven allegations is not merely a coincidence.
“Social media works with the logic of attention. Content that is disgusting or provokes anger will spread quickly and create a sense of moral justification for those who spread it,” he said.
He explained that this massive dissemination encourages an informational cascade, which is when many people consider the popularity of information as proof of its truth. “In situations like this, verification loses out to collective emotions,” he said.
The problem becomes more serious when authorities respond to viral issues without strict clarification procedures. From a sociological perspective, he explained, authorities are not only enforcers of rules but also holders of symbolic authority.
“The public reads the authorities’ response as validation. When the authorities intervene, the public tends to conclude that a violation has indeed occurred, even if the evidence is unclear,” he said.
According to him, the authorities’ quick response is often driven by public opinion pressure and the need to show firmness. “This is a reactive form of crisis management, not knowledge-based. The priority is to quell the commotion, not to ascertain the truth,” he explained.
In such conditions, small traders are in the most vulnerable position. Structurally, they have limited economic, social, and symbolic capital.
“They do not have the resources to defend themselves, access experts, or manage public narratives. As a result, enforcement by the authorities has the potential to turn into symbolic enforcement that punishes vulnerable groups,” he said.
He linked this situation to labeling theory: stigma does not arise from facts alone, but from the process of labeling by those in power. “Once the label ‘dangerous’ is attached, small traders are forced to prove their innocence in an unequal public space,” he said.
Furthermore, the social impact of this process does not stop at clarification. Reputations are damaged, social relationships are severed, and livelihoods are weakened. “Digital traces and social memory are far more durable than official denials,” he explained.
Dr Ivanovic warned that if the authorities’ reactive response to virality continues, society risks forming a culture of trial by social media. “Truth is determined by mass pressure, not procedure. The state is present not as a protector of citizens, but as a reinforcer of stigma,” he concluded. (AS)(IAAS/KDP)
