Beyond Domination and Deliberation: A Foucault-Habermas Synthesis on Power, Discourse, and Critical Communication in the Digital Public Sphere
Melampaui Dominasi dan Musyawarah: Sintesis Foucault-Habermas tentang Kekuasaan, Wacana, dan Komunikasi Kritis di Ranah Publik Digital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57032/jsd.v6i1.354Keywords:
komunikasi kritis, wacana, kekuasaan, Foucault, Habermas, distorsi komunikasiAbstract
This article aims to analyze the relationship between communication, power, and discourse through a critical synthesis of the thought of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas within the framework of critical communication theory. This study is motivated by the strengthening of communication distortions in the digital public space, when discourse is not only a means of exchanging meanings, but also a mechanism for the production of truth, normalization, opinion formation, and legitimacy of power. This study uses a qualitative approach with a critical literature review design. The research data is sourced from the primary works of Foucault and Habermas as well as supporting academic literature on critical communication theory, digital media, algorithms, public space, and surveillance capitalism. The analysis is carried out thematically-critically through the identification of key concepts, categorization of themes, comparison of Foucault-Habermas thought, and the preparation of conceptual synthesis. The findings of the study show that discourse works as a mechanism of production of a truth regime that determines what is considered legitimate, normal, and acceptable in the public sphere. In addition, modern communication is distorted when communicative actions are replaced by strategic actions controlled by political, economic, bureaucratic, media, and algorithmic interests of digital platforms. The Foucault-Habermas synthesis shows that critical communication is a dual arena: on the one hand it can be an instrument of domination, but on the other hand it can be a space of emancipation through reflective consciousness, the production of counter-discourse, and the expansion of deliberative public space. The originality of this article lies in the offer of a Foucault-Habermas conceptual synthesis to understand the dominance, distortion, and emancipation of communication in digital public spaces, especially in the context of Indonesian society
References
Almuqren, A. (2023). The contemporary public sphere: Habermas’ perspective. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 10(6), 183–192.
Aswar, A., Mutiullah, M., Fahrozi, A., Sari, D. R., Ismail, Z., & Anggraini, F. (2025). Survey as an instrument of power: A discourse analysis of knowledge production by survey institutions in Indonesia from the perspective of Michel Foucault. Frontiers in Political Science, 7, 1715985.
Capodivacca, S., & Giacomini, G. (2024). Discipline and power in the digital age: Critical reflections from Foucault’s thought. Foucault Studies, 36(1), 227–251.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Vintage.
Foucault, M. (2013). Archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.
Fuchs, C. (2016). Critical theory of communication: New readings of Lukacs, Adorno, Marcuse, Honneth and Habermas in the age of the internet. University of Westminster Press.
Fuchs, C. (2020). Communication and capitalism: A critical theory. University of Westminster Press.
Gordon, C. (Editor). (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Pantheon Books.
Habermas, J. (1985a). The theory of communicative action: Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1985b). The theory of communicative action: Volume 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1998). Between facts and norms: An author’s reflections. Denver University Law Review, 76, 937–942.
Hall, S. (2001). Foucault: Power, knowledge and discourse. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: A reader (pp. 72–81). SAGE Publications.
Handoko, G. R., & Swastiningsih, S. (2025). The role of political communication in addressing polarization and identity politics in Indonesian democracy. Journal of Law and Humanity Studies, 2(2), 62–67.
Horkheimer, M. (1972). Traditional and critical theory. In Critical theory: Selected essays (pp. 188–243). Continuum.
Ingram, D. (1994). Foucault and Habermas on the subject of reason. State University of New York Press.
Khan, T. H., & MacEachen, E. (2021). Foucauldian discourse analysis: Moving beyond a social constructionist analytic. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–9.
Pitsoe, V. J., & Vlăduțescu, Ș. (2024). A critical analysis of Foucault’s power and knowledge in higher education research. Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 11(1), 41–51.
Qudratullah, Q., Nohong, M., Iqbal, M., Susanti, R., & Alkanan, O. M. T. (2025). Towards discursive justice: An integrative Foucault-Islam framework for critical media discourse analysis in justice issues. Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Syir’ah, 23(1), 156–169.
Yang, F. (2022). Habermas, Foucault and the political-legal discussions in China: A discourse on law and democracy. Springer Nature.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rudianto Widodo

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

