The Relationship Between Context Collapse and Audience Risk Perception with Self-Censorship in the Expression of Public Issues Among Social Media Users in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71238/jcmpl.v1i01.192Abstract
The emergence of social media as a space for public discussion has changed the way individuals express opinions and participate in social discourse. However, the openness of digital communication environments creates challenges related to uncertain audiences and potential social consequences. This study aims to examine the relationship between context collapse and audience risk perception with self-censorship behavior in expressing public issues among social media users in Indonesia. This research employs a quantitative approach using a survey method involving 225 social media users in Indonesia. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire using a five-point Likert scale and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25. The data analysis included validity testing, reliability testing, classical assumption testing, descriptive analysis, and multiple linear regression analysis. The results indicate that context collapse has a positive and significant relationship with self-censorship behavior, demonstrating that uncertainty regarding diverse audiences encourages users to regulate their online expressions. Furthermore, audience risk perception shows a stronger positive relationship with self-censorship, indicating that concerns regarding criticism, social conflict, and reputational consequences influence individuals’ decisions to limit public expression. The findings demonstrate that social media users in Indonesia actively negotiate between participation and risk management when engaging in discussions about public issues. This study contributes to digital communication research by explaining how audience complexity and perceived social risks shape self-regulatory communication practices in online environments.
References
Bar-Tal, D. (2017). Self-Censorship: The Conceptual Framework. In Self-Censorship in Contexts of Conflict (pp. 1–18). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63378-7_1
Cook, P., & Heilmann, C. (2013). Two Types of Self-Censorship: Public and Private. Political Studies, 61(1), 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00957.x
Das, S., & Kramer, A. D. I. (2013). Self-Censorship on Facebook. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 7(1), 120–127. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14412
Davis, J. L., & Jurgenson, N. (2014). Context collapse: theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society, 17(4), 476–485. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.888458
Gearhart, S., & Zhang, W. (2014). Gay Bullying and Online Opinion Expression: Testing Spiral of Silence in the Social Media Environment. Social Science Computer Review, 32(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313504261
Gil-Lopez, T., Shen, C., Benefield, G. A., Palomares, N. A., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2018). One Size Fits All: Context Collapse, Self-Presentation Strategies and Language Styles on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(3), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy006
Hayes, A. F. (2007). Exploring the Forms of Self-Censorship: On the Spiral of Silence and the Use of Opinion Expression Avoidance Strategies. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 785–802. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00368.x
Hayes, A. F., Glynn, C. J., & Shanahan, J. (2005). Willingness to Self-Censor: A Construct and Measurement Tool for Public Opinion Research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17(3), 298–323. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh073
Hoffmann, C. P., & Lutz, C. (2017). Spiral of Silence 2.0: Political Self-Censorship among Young Facebook Users. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Social Media & Society (pp. 1–12). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3097286.3097296
Hu, W., & Barradas, D. (2023). Work in Progress: A Glance at Social Media Self-Censorship in North America. In 2023 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW) (pp. 609–618). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EuroSPW59978.2023.00072
Litt, E., & Hargittai, E. (2016). The Imagined Audience on Social Network Sites. Social Media + Society, 2(1), 2056305116633482. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116633482
Loh, J. M. I., & Walsh, M. J. (2021). Social Media Context Collapse: The Consequential Differences Between Context Collusion Versus Context Collision. Social Media + Society, 7(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211041646
Marwick, A. E., & boyd, danah. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
Rehman, Z. U. (2020). Antecedents, consequences, and reducers of perceived risk in social media: A systematic literature review and directions for further research. Psychology & Marketing, 37(1), 74–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21281
Vitak, J. (2012). The Impact of Context Collapse and Privacy on Social Network Site Disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.732140
Walsh, M. J., & Baker, S. A. (2022). Avoiding conflict and minimising exposure: Face-work on Twitter. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 28(3), 664–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565211036797
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Apriyanto Apriyanto, Sri Chatun, Alfin Fahmi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Paper Template 
