Testriono and Firda Amalia Putri – West Java Governor Dedi Mulyadi has risen to become one of the most popular politicians in Indonesia after short videos of his antics went viral online, garnering 'likes' from social media users within and beyond his constituency.
For many, Dedi's rise is reminiscent of that of former president Joko "Jokowi" Widodo, who successfully built his social media image as a technocratic populist while serving as mayor of Solo in Central Java and later governor of Jakarta, before winning the presidency. Like Jokowi, Dedi has portrayed himself as a down-to-earth and no-nonsense leader who can get things done by conducting impromptu visits.
The latest example is the video featuring his recent visit to the Hibisc Fantasy amusement park in Puncak, Bogor, West Java. In the video, Dedi accused the park's management of violating regulations on spatial planning, causing massive floods and landsldes. For that, he ordered the amusement park to be closed and demolished.
In another video, Dedi conducted an unannounced inspection at Caringin Market in Bandung, West Java, and discovered a buildup of waste reaching 1,000 tons. The inspection followed reports that market management had failed to remove the garbage for the past three months. After the surprise inspection by the governor, the pile of garbage at Caringin Market was eventually removed.
It is safe to say that Dedi, like Jokowi, is a digitally-empowered populist. This is reflected by the fact that he harnesses digital technologies – social media platforms – to amplify his populist actions and emotional appeal rather than technocratic-driven policymaking. His actions to steer public emotions include giving cash to the poor or peddlers he meets randomly on the street, which he films and shares online.
Dedi's problematic populist policies
Certainly, there is nothing inherently wrong about Dedi's social media activities and high media visibility. If anything, it may improve openness and transparency, as well as policy responsiveness. Regular fieldwork visits to villages and city neighbourhoods can help him tailor projects to local priorities to better reflect citizens' needs and preferences. His digital approach to policy-making has enabled him to do away with formal reporting requirements such as audits and evaluations by local agencies.
However, Dedi's populist policies are problematic. We define 'populist policies' as actions and initiatives taken by a government that appear to privilege the interests of the 'common people' or the unified 'will of the people', with a tendency to please the majority. These policies tend to focus on quick fixes that rely on oversimplication.
It is dangerous to make the people promises without a strong policy foundation or careful agenda setting. In public policy formation, agenda setting helps policymakers prioritise problems that need to be addressed.
Reform without a clear agenda, especially when addressing complex issues, may lead to ineffective or unintended outcomes. A clear understanding of goals and priorities is crucial for a successful reform initiative.
Dedi's policies certainly contribute to his image as a populist leader who appears to have the leadership skills to resolve all kinds of public problems. But without a clear agenda, many seem just knee-jerk reactions to random problems. This explains why many of his policies are extremely simplistic, such as sending unruly students to military barracks, creating an anti-thuggery task force, and forcing students to start school at 6:30 am.
Policies like these are bad, either because they make no sense or because existing studies have found they will not work. The problem with Dedi's populism is that he does not spend enough time to find the root cause of a problem so he can offer a real solution.
The quest for sustainable policies
Certainly, Dedi's populism has helped him gain public support. Current economic hardship coupled with dissatisfaction toward the political elite and a failing political system has created space for a populist leader like him.
However, a critical question arises: to what extent does Dedi's 'charm offensive' translate into tangible, long-term policies?
Many populist politicians tend to focus more on image-building than on implementing programs that address fundamental societal problems. Peters and Pierre (2004) highlight the dangers of politicising image construction. This can undermine the quality of public policy because the focus shifts from policy planning and implementation to cultivating a leader's image, neglecting long-term solutions that serve public interests.
Although digital content easily goes viral and captures attention, policy formulation and implementation remain complex processes that require in-depth analysis and cross-institutional coordination. The public must be critical to avoid being swayed by flashy appearances without assessing whether the actual outcomes yield long-term benefits.
Dedi Mulyadi's leadership exemplifies the paradox of contemporary populism: while his 'digital charisma' and 'man of the people' narratives resonate widely, his reliance on controversial shortcuts – such as militarised discipline for students or anti-thuggery task forces – reveals a governance style that prioritises spectacle over systemic reform.
Like many other populists, Dedi's approach risks eroding democratic norms by centralising authority, marginalising institutional checks and balances, and framing complex issues as battles between 'the people' and a corrupt elite. Without tangible, long-term policies to address poverty, inequality, or bureaucratic inefficiency, such strategies deepen democratic erosion rather than strengthen democracy.
Greater demand for accountability
Indonesia's challenge, therefore, lies not in rejecting populist appeal outright but in demanding accountability: leaders who harness mass engagement must also deliver institutional resilience. Otherwise, the cycle of charismatic promises and unmet expectations will continue, leaving democracy perpetually vulnerable to disillusionment.
Therefore, true political education, which breeds critical thinking among people about public policies, is essential so that citizens can evaluate the quality of policies crafted by leaders.
Indonesian civil society must foster critical media literacy and demand transparency in policy implementation. Being critical does not mean rejecting all political promises but entails distinguishing between realistic commitments and mere image-building.
Equitable political education, transparent access to information, and the strong role of media and civil society are crucial to strengthening this awareness.