The Discourse of Covids-19 Pandemic Policies in Indonesia

Since covid-19 has become pandemic, an abundance of coronavirus news fills the mass media throughout the world. The pandemic is constructed verbally from various perspectives for many purposes. In Indonesia, the discourse of the pandemic is not only about the disease, but also about other social issues related to the pandemic. Through certain discourses, the text producers may present various meanings. This study purposes to uncover social meanings presented in the discourses constructed by the mass media regarding the Indonesian government policies to cut the Covid-19 pandemic. Using a critical discourse analysis approach, the researchers analyze clauses containing three terms: Isolasi Mandiri, PSBB, and local lockdown from 28 downloaded texts. The focus of analysis is on the selection of lexico-grammar used to represent the policies to cut the chain of the pandemic. The result shows that there are three patterns in positioning participants regarding who has to take the responsibility for the implementation of the policies. The discourse about Isolasi Mandiri position residents as a party who has to be responsible and the government was positioned as the controller. The discourse of PSBB has positioned the government as a party that conducts and controls the implementation of the policies. The discourse of local lockdown represented that the policy was only as planning urged by the NGO and has not been conducted by the government. The context influencing the discourse is the socio-economic context. The discourses also show that the way media represented the policies is in line with the government agenda.

Since covid-19 has become pandemic, an abundance of coronavirus news fills the mass media throughout the world. The pandemic is constructed verbally from various perspectives for many purposes. In Indonesia, the discourse of the pandemic is not only about the disease, but also about other social issues related to the pandemic. Through certain discourses, the text producers may present various meanings. This study purposes to uncover social meanings presented in the discourses constructed by the mass media regarding the Indonesian government policies to cut the Covid-19 pandemic. Using a critical discourse analysis approach, the researchers analyze clauses containing three terms: Isolasi Mandiri, PSBB, and local lockdown from 28 downloaded texts. The focus of analysis is on the selection of lexico-grammar used to represent the policies to cut the chain of the pandemic. The result shows that there are three patterns in positioning participants regarding who has to take the responsibility for the implementation of the policies. The discourse about Isolasi Mandiri position residents as a party who has to be responsible and the government was positioned as the controller. The discourse of PSBB has positioned the government as a party that conducts and controls the implementation of the policies. The discourse of local lockdown represented that the policy was only as planning urged by the NGO and has not been conducted by the government. The context influencing the discourse is the socio-economic context. The discourses also show that the way media represented the policies is in line with the government agenda.
A R T I C L E I N F O

Introduction
COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most important events creating circumstances that give rise to new terms adopted by different countries for expressing new challenges. In addition to the name "COVID-19" created by WHO in February 2020, around the globe the English words "coronavirus", "lockdown", self-isolation, and "quarantine" have been used since March, 2020 (Salazar 2020). For example, for "lockdowns" some countries use "shelter-in-place" or "stay-at-home-order" in the US, "enhanced-community quarantine" in the Philippines, and "movement-control-order" in Malaysia (Ro 2020), as well as other countries that use local languages as translations of the expressions. A list commonly used COVID-19 related words is very useful only for the experts and officials but not for the uneducated local inhabitants (Jackson 2020), including the Indonesian government officials up to the village levels using these foreign terms in their Indonesian sentences. Other interesting issues related to the COVIDS-19 outbreak are the ways individuals or institutions construct discourses to response the outbreak. Some

Research Methods
Systemic functional grammar (SFG) is an analysis of language use focusing on grammar as a system of creating and expressing meaning of human experience and relationship. In communication with other human beings, language system or grammar allows interlocutors to strategically structure thoughts and intents to create and express functional meaning to achieve certain goals (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004). Using lexico-grammar, the interdependence of vocabulary and syntax, this study will explain the underlying structured components that provide meaning-creating resources for effective, specific expression and communication in general. This constitutes a discourse analysis relying on language system leading to in depth language function analysis and not just a commentary on texts (Halliday and Matthiesen 2004). Scholars agree that SFL provides thorough methods of critical discourse analysis (CDA) based on text linguistics to unveil structural power relationships, inequality, and discrimination in language use (Wodak, 1996) in various filed of studies (van Dijk, 2001), including in analyzing media studies (Machin & Mayr 2013).
In the analysis of the texts, this study will follow Halliday's (1978) suggestions to employ register which consist of three parameters of semiotic functions: Field (the context or reality that texts is about), tenor (the relationships among participants of the linguistic act) and mode (the means communication). In this way, the semantic function of SFG analysis is construed in three meta-functions: ideational (the representation of external reality including the actions, events, and the objects in the processes), interpersonal (the relationships between the interlocutors/communicators) and the textual (conceivable meanings constructed in the structure of the texts).
The data are collected from various media that cover COVID-19 related expressions in the rules, instructions, and policies implemented by government officials to deal with the pandemic. These data are selected from selected prominent local and national media that broadcast news on how the government cope with the challenges of the pandemic. The selection is based on the importance, representativeness and frequency of the expressions being used in describing the government policies. Using Google search machine, we selected and downloaded texts of news discourses containing key words Isolasi Mandiri, PSBB, Karantina Wilayah, and Lockdown. Using the such method of gathering data, we found 28 texts divided into three groups: data of Isolasi Mandiri (DIM), data of PSBB (DPSBB), and data of Karantina Wilayah (DKW).
With the identification of the agent using the verb/predicate/action words as strategic choices for constructing meaning, it is hoped that this study will show a new development in the Indonesian linguistics that reflect the government efforts to establish strategies of dealing with the pandemic as well as power relation constructed by this language system.

Results and Discussion
The results of the analysis show that the discourses of the policies to cut Covid-19 pandemic are not merely discourses about what the policies are, but also about who have right to implement the policies, who control the policies, and who have to take responsibility of the policies.
Naming the policy of restricting social and physical activities as Isolasi Mandiri, PSBB, and karantina lokal represents who must be responsible for the activities. Using the word mandiri 'self' represents that they are people who do isolation that must be responsible for all consequences of the praxis. The word pembatasan in PSBB 'restriction' generates a meaning that there is an action of restricting, an agent undergoing the action and a goal at which the action is directed. The word sosial in PSBB also represented what kinds of activities that are restricted. The group of word berskala besar functions to inform the extent to which the restriction is applied. The word lokal in karantina lokal represents the scope of the quarantine.
Positioning the government and the residents as active participants of processes in clauses constructed to encode the policies does not mean that the two participants have similar power. Residents as individual members of social institution are positioned as active participant in the implementation of self-isolation praxis. This generates meaning that residents take responsibility for the policy. On the other hand, positioning the government as active participants in the discourse of PSBB and local lockdown means that the text producers represent government as the party which articulates the power to regulate and to control the policies

Isolasi mandiri
Isolasi mandiri 'self-isolation' is a term referring to an activity of avoiding contact with other people. This is one of the Indonesian government policies to cut the spread of COVID-19 during the outbreak. Self-Isolation is intended to people tested positive for COVID-19 but showing no serious symptoms, and to people who have interacted with sufferers of COVID-19. Once created and continuously used by both government and media, the term becomes popular and is received as shared information among people. The knowledge people have about Isolasi mandiri, among other things, depends on the way media use the term and construct its meaning. Using systemic functional grammar approach, we focus on analyzing the function of each element of clauses containing the noun group isolasi mandiri. Of 35 clauses about isolasi mandiri, 25 clauses use the noun group as a goal of material processes worded through the verbs melakukan 'to do', menjalankan 'to run', menjalani 'to undergo', and memilih 'to choose'; 4 clauses put the noun group as a goal but leaving out the process, meaning that the process must be derived from the context; and 6 clauses place the noun group as carrier of attributive process and as a temporal circumstance.
As transitive verbs, melakukan and menjalani need object referring an activity or happening. On the other hand, the verbs menjalankan and memilih need objects referring either activities or things. Among the four verbs, three of them, melakukan, menjalankan, and menjalani are used to portrait the similar situation when combined with the noun group isolasi mandiri, that is doing activity of avoiding contact with other people. Wording the activity as noun group through nominalization is a strategy to compress the whole process of avoiding contact, because the text producer may have assumption that text receivers can guest the process from the meaning of each element of the noun group. When isolasi madiri is combined with the verb memilih 'choosing', as in example 1, there is an implicit meaning that actually the doer of action may do other actions, but he/she chooses to do selfisolation.

1) Dipilihnya isolasi mandiri oleh Kapolda Bengkulu yang baru ini setelah ditetapkannya mantan Kapolda Bengkulu Irjen Supratman pada Sabtu (9/5/2020) terpapar positif Covid-19. (DIM 1)
'The choice of self-isolation by the new head of Bengkulu Regional Police followed the decision that the former head of Bengkulu Regional Police, the Inspector General Supratman was positively exposed by Covid-19 on Saturday (05/09/2020).' The clause produces meaning that isolasi mandiri is a choice among the others. The active participant, the new head of Bengkulu Regional Police, may or may not do the self-isolation. Using attributive processes, the text producer wants to characterize the self-isolation. The data show us that putting the noun group isolasi mandiri as a carrier, the text producer gives an attribute of the carrier as sangat penting untuk mengurangi resiko menularkan kepada orang lain 'is very important to reduce the risk of infecting other people'. The discourse produces social meaning of generating self-awareness to look after others from being infected. This discourse is different from the common discourse of preventing infectious disease that the efforts made when there is an outbreak are to keep ourselves not being infected from others. Other attributives of isolasi mandiri as a carrier are tidak berjalan baik 'does not run well', memerlukan disiplin 'needs discipline', and cocok diterapkan di luar negeri 'be appropriate to be applied abroad'. The three attributives are produced in the same text and build a coherent meaning as a cause-effect relation. The discourse may imply that the self-isolation of Indonesian people, different from foreign people, does not run well because the Indonesian people may be not discipline.
The active participants or agents of the self-isolation activity in data are individuals or common people such as Puluhan Nelayan Pekalongan 'Dozens of Pekalongan Fishermen'; Empat keluarga di Kelurahan Papanggo, Tanjung Priok 'four families in Papanggo District,Tanjung Priok'; 106 Warga di Timika '106 citizens in Timika'; and Hampir 3 Ribu Orang 'almost three thousand people'. In example 1, Kapolda Bengkulu yang baru 'the new head of Bengkulu regional Police' as the agent of the material process also represented individual, instead of the institution. The such discourse represented self-isolation as an activity initiated by individuals. The use of the word mandiri 'by self/selves' means that the responsibility and the consequences caused by the isolation is on the individuals. Self-isolation means keep staying at a certain place and avoiding contact with other people. It causes the person who undergoes self-isolation cannot earn money and buy daily needs for living. The such problem must be solved by the person who does the self-isolation, rather than the government. The meaning is inferred through the use of the word bantuan 'help' not kewajiban 'obligation' referring to the financial or material contribution by external parties such as government or other citizens. Using the word bantuan, the government may want to release the responsibility to fulfill all the daily needs of all who do the self-isolation. This is difficult to realize because of the limited funds of the government.
Even though the expression isolasi mandiri literally has a meaning of doing itself and independence, the government is assumed to have power to control the activity. The control is represented through the negative polarity such as in example 2, 3, and 4.

2)
tidak berjalannya isolasi mandiri … karena secara umum kurang dipantau petugas 'the fact that self-isolation does not run... because generally self-isolation has not been controlled by officers' (DIM 6) 3) petugas jarang memeriksa situasi di rumah mereka yang melakukan isolasi mandiri. 'officers rarely examine the situation in the homes of residents who undergo self-isolation' (DIM 6) 4) Ketika bilang isolasi mandiri, petugas tidak mengecek situasi rumah, dengan siapa, kamar berapa, itu tak dilakukan. 'When someone said that he conducted self-isolation, the officer did not check the situation of the house, with whom the patient lived, how many rooms did the house have. The officer has not checked the condition' (DIM 6) In examples 2-4, the text producer produced implicit discourses that there are officers that have duty to control the self-isolation. The discourses also show that controlling is legitimate. However, the examples show us that the control covers only whether or not people do the self-isolation appropriately due to the protocol to cut the COVID 19 spread. Again, logistic availability is not the responsibility of the government. Control of the selfisolation is also articulated using the modal adjunct wajib and harus 'must'. However, using agentless passive construction such as in examples 5 and 6, the text producer may assume that the doers of action have become general knowledge or are not important to identify. This is also the discourse strategy to foreground the action of controlling and place the controller as background information.

6)
Mereka masih harus menjalani isolasi mandiri selama 14 hari di lantai dua dan tiga musala. 'They still have to undergo self-isolation for 14 days on the second and third floor of the mushola.'

PSBB
The second term that is popular during the pandemic COVID-19 period in Indonesia is Pembatasan Sosial Berskala Besar (PSBB) 'Large-Scale Social Restriction'. According to The Regulation of Minister of the Indonesian Health Regulation no 9 year 2020, PSBB is a restriction of certain activities of residents in an area suspected to be infected with Corona Virus Disease 2019 in such a way as to prevent possibilities the spread of Corona Virus Disease 2019 . The term is used to refer to a government policy to limit the activities of Indonesian citizens. Compared to the discourses of selfisolation representing the individual initiation to cut the spread of the pandemic, discourses related to PSBB are more about the application, rules, and impacts of the policy. The way the text producers chose the lexico-grammars to produce the texts informs us what kind of a policy it is, who has the authority of the policy, to whom the policy intended, how the policy is implemented, and what is the impact of the implementation.
Using the discourse grammar perspective, we find meaning that PSBB is the element of participants either as a thing or as a classifier. As a thing, PSBB is nominalization of the process of limiting citizens' activities. The nominalization results deleting information of agency (who limits social activities?) and reifying concept of membatasi 'limiting' as an agent (Fowler 1979). Once the term was created, it has been repeatedly and widely used in many discourses. Using PSBB as a thing in a clause, a text producer presupposed an existential meaning. As a thing, PSBB has a role as an active participant of relational process of happening and ending realized through the verbs berlaku and berakhir; and as an agent of material process through the verb group memutus mata rantai COVID-19 'to break the chain of COVID-19'. It means that the such discourse naturalizes the existence of the social activity as entity ignoring the agent of the activity, as the entity PSBB may start, end, and any other activities.
As a classifier, PSBB classifies other DE verbal nouns such as in table 1. Classifier, according to Systemic Functional Grammar (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014), functions to make sub-class of things. Using the concept, we find that in Table 1, PSBB as classifier functions to create sub-class of the entities or the things. However, another interpretation can be found. When talking about PSBB, someone can talk about the way it is implemented or practiced (row 1), its duration (row 2), its regulation (row 3), and its result (row 4). All the information regarding PSBB in the form of "thing plus classifier" leads us that the such discourse is a kind of discourse about a policy. This interpretation is strengthened by combining the meaning with the meaning of other elements in clause level. Using transitivity system, we found the ways entities or things participate in the social events. As we know, a clause, according to Systemic Functional Grammar (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014), represents ideational meaning, the meaning of 'the world', through the information about what process happens, does, is (processes); who participates in the processes (participants); and how, why, when, and where the processes happen, does, and are (circumstances). Tracking participants of the process can bring out how people or things are positioned socially through discourse. Table 2 shows that Participants 1 or active participants refer to PSBB, governments, citizens, inflation, and activity. PSBBs that cover its practice, implementation, policy are positioned as participants that do non-goal material processes of happening and ending. They also are also depicted as carriers having attributes such as fail, different, effective/not effective, and worse. All the descriptions represent PSBB as non-active participants. There are only two data picturing PSBB as active participant is in no 3 and 10. In data 3, PSBB is positioned as a participant which break the chain of COVID-19. However, because PSBB is nominalization of certain process, it is the agents who do the limitation that break the chain. PSBB is only a tool to do that. Positioning PSBB as the agent of the breaking is a discourse strategy to eliminate the real agent. In data 10, the policy of PSBB functions as an agent that causes the condition of inflation. Positioning PSBB as non-active participants is also represented through selecting PSBB as goals of the material processes (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 226). Data 11 -25 in Table 2 show that PSBB is the goal of activities conducted by some agents. Positioning the government as an agent, the text producers selects certain activities, such as doing, implementing, taking on, extending, and regulating PSBB. The "such activities" are the ones that can be conducted only by the power participants towards the powerless participants. The discourses show that PSBB is a policy that is under control of the government. On the other hand, when the text producers selected citizens as agents, they chose discourse that the agents undergo and obey PSBB. The discourse constructs the power relation between the agents (citizens) and their goals (PSBB). The power participant is PSBB. In this context, PSBB is a policy made by the government. It can be inferred that the discourse produce meaning of power relation between citizens and the government.
Other discourse strategies representing PSBB is through agentless passive construction as in no 11-13 in Table 2. In the data, PSBB is positioned as a goal of abstract material processes realized through dibuktikan, dibarengi, and diperpanjang. Deleting agents of the processes may be intended to construct shared interpretation that the agent is the government. The interpretation is based on the general assumption that the government is the institution that has authority to implement and to extend the policy. Table 2 also positioned PSBB as reason and matter circumstances (no 25 and 26). The "such discourse" strategy results in the presupposition meanings, those are 'PSBB gives impact' and 'there is implementation of PSBB'. The first presupposition may be intended to posit another shared knowledge about the meaning. This may be the strategy to posit ideological meaning that the implementation of PSBB has certain impact. This may reinforce the strategy in representing PSBB through the noun groups as explained before.

Karantina Wilayah and Lockdown
The two terms Karantina wilayah 'local lockdown' and lockdown are used interchangeable. Therefore, in this paper we used (local) lockdown referring to the two terms. The average discourses of (local) lockdown are actually similar to the discourses of self -isolation. As a participant, (local) lockdown also refers to a policy that is represented through its implementation, regulation, impact, failure, and success. It also is positioned more as goal, value, or carrier rather than other passive participants. However, there are some interesting issues represented through the discourses.
When (local) lockdown is positioned as value and carrier, the text producers give information more about the definition and characterization of (local) lockdown. This implies that the text producers may assume the that is the new term, so it is necessary to introduce the concept to public. The attribute and token of the (local) lockdown that is exposed are the limitation of the citizens' activities, the effective policy to cut the pandemic, one of the other alternatives. As a goal, (local) lockdown is represented as one to which the process of proposing is extended (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014: 226). This means that the (local lockdown) has not been really implemented (see example 7).

7
NasDem usul karantina wilayah DKI cegah virus corona meluas. (DKW 3) 'NasDem proposed quarantine of DKI area to prevent the corona virus from spreading' The use of linguistic expressions such as mungkin (epistemic modality), harus, seharusnya (deontic modality), future temporal, and irrealis mood also shows that there is no (local) lockdown in Indonesia. The discourses only represented the planning, the desire, the encouragement of certain institutions to ask the government to implement the (local) lockdown. Using seharusnya (example 8) the actor argued that the policy must be the case, but it was not. This is the representation of power to make prediction from the institution. The "such discourse" implies the opposing relation between a plaintiff representing the opposition and the government. Another strategy to articulate the power of making prediction is using the irrealis discourse such as in example 9. This is the discourse to reinforce the argument suggesting for implementing (local) lockdown in example 8. Using the irrealis clause, the text producer argued that there is a positive consequence if the (local) lockdown were taken.
(DLI 8) 'After one resident of Tegal, Central Java was positively infected with the corona virus or Covid-19, the Tegal Mayor, Dedy Yon Supriyono immediately took the local lockdown policy by closing access in and out of the city for the next four months' What is the discourse produced by the government? Almost all clauses positioning the government as the actor of the material processes such as implementing, taking, and choosing (local) lockdown are in negative polarity realized by the words belum and tidak. The use of positive polarity to represent the matter occurs in the discourse of (local) lockdown in Tegal region (example 10). However, the discourse imposed the different meaning of (local) lockdown through the circumstance "…dengan cara menutup akses keluar masuk kota selama empat bulan ke depan". This is not the concept lockdown as shared generally. The (local) lockdown implemented in Tegal is actually PSBB (see 3.1.2).

Discourse Practice and Social Practice
Discourse is context-dependent and social construct. Isolasi mandiri, PSBB, and Karantina Wilayah are new terms created by the Indonesian government referring to the policies to overcome the Covid-19 pandemic in Indonesia. The way media produced discourse regarding the policies implies the social relation between the powerful and the powerless institution. In this part, the focus is about to answer why the text producer produced the "such discourses" instead of the others.
In producing the discourse about self-isolation, when text producers positioned individual citizens as active participants, they may intend to construct the knowledge that self-isolation is a social practice of citizen's domain. The content of discourse focusing only on 'who do self-isolation where and when' resulted the implication of foregrounding the event and backgrounding the meaning that self-isolation is actually the government's policy. The absent of other personal participants implies that the text producers constructed the relation between the individuals and the activity of self-isolation. Even though self-isolation is one of the public calls made by the government, the repetitive news of the such discourse in many place results the shared knowledge that public must have selfawareness of doing the self-isolation if they have the Covid symptom. The position of the government, in this case, is as controller of the social practice. The such narrative implies that the media functions as the channel of the power institution to naturalize the policy. This is different from the opposing discourse of the same social event in News Asia that self-isolation is punishing poor people in Indonesia (https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/covid-19-coronavirus-indonesia-poor-gig-work-gojek-selfisolate-12567552). The clause constructed the articulation of power from the government through the practice of self-isolation. Different from the discourse about self-isolation, the PSBB and (local) lockdown discourses tend to position the government as an active participant that has responsibility to conduct, to control, and to evaluate the social events. The participants involving in the PSBB discourse is the government and PSBB. The discourse is limited to 'when the PSBB started and ended; whether or not the PSBB would be extended; and whether or not the PSBB success'. Through the discourse, we can derive social meaning that PSBB is a tool used by the government to control the residents. The power relation is explicitly articulated through the discourse such as "Sementara itu, Gubernur DKI Jakarta Anies Baswedan mengatakan bila masyarakat memilih untuk taat maka PSBB akan berakhir. Namun apabila masyarakat memilih untuk tidak mematuhi aturan PSBB, maka PSBB terpaksa diperpanjang kembali." (Meanwhile, DKI Jakarta Governor, Anies Baswedan, said that if people choose to obey, the PSBB will end. However, if they choose not to obey the PSBB rules, the PSBB will have to be extended again). The discourse may also imply that evaluation about the success or failure of PSBB is limited on seeing whether or not the residents obey the policy, not on the performance of the government in ruling the policy. The such discourse of PSBB may be intended to construct shared meaning that to cut the covid-19 pandemic, articulating power to restrict the residents' social activities must be accepted as a natural practice.
The third discourse, the (local) lockdown discourse, constructed the meaning that (local) lockdown is just an alternative that may be applied if necessary. The dominant meaning of the discourse is about the voice of the non-government institution urging the government to implement the (local) lockdown and the readiness of the government if the (local) lockdown must be implemented. However, the discourse that it is the national government that has the authority to do or not to do the (local) lockdown may be interpreted as a discourse strategy to send message to public that (local) lockdown will not be implemented in Indonesia because it needs too many financial funds. This discourse may also the one aimed to naturalize the government act regarding the effort to cut the spread of Covid-19 pandemic.
The three kinds of Covid-19 pandemic discourses using three terms are the discourses that are influencing the Member Resource of the text receivers (readers of the news). The three terms become familiar among public society and the continuing exposure of the discourse through online and offline media makes the shared awareness among the society that self-isolation, PSBB, and (local) lockdown are the policies that be implemented to stop the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic. Once the knowledge resides in the long term memory of the society and becomes new Member Resource, it will shape the way the society produce new discourse. The following multi-media discourse is the result of shaping Member Resource relating the government's policies of cutting the Covid-19 pandemic. In figure 1, lockdown means prohibit outsiders to come to the area because they are afraid that the outsiders are the ones who are suspected Covid-19. The message is biased from the authentic meaning of lockdown, in that an area is locked down if there are some residents are suspected Covid-19. The dialectic relationship between Member Resource and Discourse is recursive, meaning that the new discourse such as in Figure 1 will construct new value that is curiosity. Everybody must be suspicious of people around him because they could be exposed to covid-19.

Conclusion and Suggestion
The result of the research shows that news discourse is socially construct. The news about Covid-19 pandemic policies in Indonesia is influenced by the social relation between government and the society and also the media alignment. The influence is seen through the choice of words, groups of words, and also grammatical structures. The words and groups of words selected to name the policies for the Covid-19 pandemic in Indonesia represent the parties which are responsible for the implementation of the policy. Using the three terms, Isolasi Mandiri, PSBB, and karantina lokal, the government may intend to share the responsibility with society. It shows us that selecting the terms is not unmotivated. On the other hand, the way the text producers presenting processes regarding the policies and positioning participants of the processes is influenced by the existing social relation between the government as the powerful party and society as the powerless one. Using the transitivity analysis, we found the meaning that the government as the policy maker may or may not take the responsibilities in the policies.
Through the discourse, media as the text producers of the news also articulate their power in selecting what narrative they construct, what sources they selected to quote, the directness of quotation, and what information they placed as foreground or background. The data show that media presented the mainstream discourse in that government has right to use power to control the implementation of the policy. The "such discourses" were imposed to the Member Resource of the readers so the social meaning constructed through the discourse will be the shared meaning among the society.