Symbol of Political Communications by Nahdlatul Ulama in East Java, Indonesia

Hamim, Suwandi Sumartias, Dadang Rahmat Hidayat, Dadang Sugiana


For the people of East Java, Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) is not just a symbol of the organization. It is an interpretation of religious teachings in practicing politics. Although Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) was created by religious figures, it was not designed to place religion as an ideology or an Islamic party. Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) is an open organization in the sense of across religions, ethnicities, races, and groups manifested in the form of a vision, mission, struggle program, membership, and leadership. This research uses the qualitative method with inductive thinking. In-depth interviews provided data collection, and data analysis was based on the subjective researchers' interpretation. Herbert Blumer's symbolic interaction theory is very relevant to be used as a tool for analysis. It is also assisted using the constructivism paradigm that explains how events or reality are created and how reality is symbolically shaped by the nahdliyin (members of Nadhlatul Ulama) in East Java. This study aims to provide an understanding of the importance of scientific studies between communication and culture of the organizational community as a tool for building political culture in the organization's role in preaching and politics.



Keywords: symbols, political communication, Nahdlatul Ulama.



Full Text:



PARAWANSAH, K. I. Islam, NU, Indonesian, Nuansa Cendekia, Bandung, 2013.

ARIFIN, A. Political Communication; Paradigm-Theory-Application-Strategy and Indonesian Political Communication. Balai Pustaka, Jakarta, 2003.

HIKMAT, Political Communication, Theory and Practice, Simbiosa Rakatama Media, Bandung. 2010.

MCNAIR, B. An Introduction in Political Communication. Routledge; London, 2003.

NIMMO, D. Political Communication; Communicators, Messages and Media. Rosda, Bandung,1999.

WAHID. Political Communication, Theory, Concepts, and Applications in New Media. Simbiosa Rekatama Media, Bandung, 2016.

BASROWI and SUKIDIN, 2002. Micro Perspective Research Methods: Grounded Theory, Phenomenology, Ethnomethodology, Ethnography, Dramaturgy, Symbolic Interaction, Hermeneutics, Social Construction, Discourse Analysis, and Reflection Methodology. Surabaya: Insan Cendekia.

CRESWELL, J.W. Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Transilte Edition), Pustaka Pelajar, Yogjakarta, 2017.

CRESWELL, John W. Research Design. Qualitative & Quantitave Approach. Sage Publishers Inc., 2008

BRENNEN, J. Guiding Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods. Student Library: Yogyakarta, 2002.

HIDAYAT, D.N. Classical Empirical Social Research Paradigm and Methodology. Jakarta; Department of Communication, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Indonesia Press, 2003.

DENZIN N.K. & LINCOLN Y.S. Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2009.

MULYANA, D. and SOLATUN, Communication Research Methods. Bandung Rosda, 2007.

CHARON, J.M. Symbolic Interactionism: An Introduction, An Interpretation, An Integration. 10th ed. Pearson, London, 2010.


  • There are currently no refbacks.