Polling conducted is considered part of criticism towards existing policies, one of them being towards the National Nutrition Agency (BGN), and not an attempt to deconstruct BGN.
Polling via social media should be impactful, as social media is one platform considered to balance mainstream media.
Furthermore, social media is currently seen as more targeted, with all segments of society using it.
“Social media can be used to improve policy as a means to try and aggregate various public interests with the policies created by the government,” it was stated.
The basis for conducting this polling is the Public Information Disclosure Law.
“This polling is positive, meaning we are trying to explore public expectations and aspirations. Of course, those expectations and aspirations are from the perspective of BGN policy, and there will naturally be pros and cons,” it was explained.
The results of this polling represent a form of public aspiration. There is public disappointment regarding BGN policy in the context of implementing the Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) program in areas where it falls far short of public expectations, including being far from the plans BGN had designed.
“Social media can be used to improve policy as a means to try and aggregate various public interests with the policies created by the government,” it was expressed.
The impact can serve as a bridge for various shortcomings. Thus, the presence of social media can become a forum for the public to criticize policies born from the government for improvement.
However, it was cautioned to differentiate between criticism and insult. In criticism, there are parameters that need to be fixed.
Whereas insult has no basis in its delivery.
“A distinction must be made between criticism and insult. Everyone has the right to criticize; there are parameters. If it is said that BGN must be improved because its policies are not successful, it means there is another side to its policies that needs fixing and must be strictly monitored,” it was emphasized.
It was added that regarding polling for officials and the public from its negative side, this polling should not be used to attack government policy.
“For the public, it should not be used as a vehicle to ‘nullify’ the program being run. Because the MBG program has its positives and negatives, the middle ground is about trying to find a midpoint to improve the existing system,” it was clarified.
In the implementation framework, such as SPPG, monitoring is needed. Because the SPPG product is often problematic for many people. Therefore, what needs to be fixed is the mechanism within SPPG.
“For example, oranges that should be provided taste sweet according to BGN guidance, but instead taste sour are given,” it was added.
Thus, it appears the mechanism within SPPG has not been set up in such a way that SPPG managers do not just seek profit but prioritize public interest.
Therefore, the role of regional governments needs to be truly maximized, so that whenever an incident occurs, there is no long bureaucratic vulnerability.
So that regional governments also take responsibility for that policy, including control.
“It seems it has not been maximized yet; there is no mechanism created for regional governments to regulate this policy,” it was concluded.
