The Power of Visual Evidence: Why Viral Imagery Drives Indonesian Activism

In Indonesia, the role of visual evidence in political activism has become increasingly significant, as viral footage of violence serves as a desperate call for accountability. The recent tragic death of 14-year-old Arianto Tawakal, who reportedly succumbed to injuries after an encounter with a police officer, triggered widespread public outrage. This incident mirrors the earlier death of Affan Kurniawan, a driver who was struck by a police vehicle during a protest. In both cases, the rapid circulation of graphic videos on social media became the primary mechanism for demanding justice, highlighting a profound erosion of public trust in state institutions.

The Evolving Role of Visual Evidence

The reliance on such intense visual evidence suggests a troubling shift in how society addresses injustice. While mobile technology has empowered citizens to document state actions and challenge official narratives, it has also created a dependency on shock value. Historically, Indonesia has seen how imagery is used to influence public perception. During the New Order era, state-sponsored media, such as the film Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI, utilized graphic depictions of violence to define political enemies and manipulate historical narratives. While modern viral videos differ in their origin, they share the underlying reality that meaningful political discourse is often mediated through the spectacle of suffering.

As citizens lose confidence in the capacity of the government to investigate wrongdoing independently, viral activism has become a default strategy. When institutional accountability is perceived as weak or performative, the public turns to shared digital evidence to verify events. However, this trend toward relying on graphic content carries significant ethical burdens. There is a tangible pressure to provide increasingly brutal imagery to capture public attention, which risks turning human suffering into a digital spectacle that is consumed repeatedly without necessarily leading to systemic change or genuine understanding.

This dynamic was famously complicated following the 1998 riots, where the demand for visual proof led to the circulation of manipulated images, ultimately undermining the claims of survivors and allowing skeptics to dismiss legitimate human rights violations. Today, this risk persists. While visual evidence is crucial for exposing abuse, it should not be the prerequisite for justice. The urgent challenge for Indonesian activism is to move beyond a model where state response is only triggered by viral, graphic proof of violence. Ultimately, building a sustainable democracy requires robust institutions capable of ensuring accountability, regardless of whether an incident is captured on camera or shared across social media platforms.