The Boundaries of Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech in the Humor of the Stand-Up Comedy Mens Rea by Pandji Pragiwaksono: A Norman Fairclough Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

This study aims to describe the representation of criticism of political and social power in the stand-up comedy show Mens Rea, analyze the boundary between freedom of expression and hate speech based on Jeffrey W. Howard’s theory, and analyze the implications of the discourse in Pandji Pragiwaksono’s stand-up comedy show Mens Rea for the dynamics of Indonesian democracy. This study employs a qualitative method using Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis paradigm, which encompasses three dimensions of analysis: the textual dimension, discursive practices, and sociocultural practices. The primary data source consists of transcripts of the stand-up comedy show Mens Rea available on Netflix, while secondary data was obtained from mass media reports, digital media, podcasts, interviews, online discussion forums, and public responses. Data were collected through observation, note-taking, and documentation, then analyzed using the Miles, Huberman, and Saldana model through the stages of data condensation, data presentation, and the drawing and verification of conclusions. The results of the first focus of the study indicated that, in the textual dimension, Pandji Pragiwaksono critiques democracy, political dynasties, nepotism, abuse of power, public policy, the political elite, and the political culture of society through linguistic strategies such as satire, irony, metaphor, hyperbole, labeling, binary opposition, and political humor. In the dimension of discursive practice, Mens Rea is the result of the transformation of various public issues that have developed in the mass media, social media, and the political sphere, which are then reproduced through the global Netflix platform, thereby expanding their distribution, consumption, and public debate. In the dimension of socio-cultural practice, political humor functions as a form of counterhegemony that encourages citizen participation in monitoring power while simultaneously fostering a space for democratic discussion. Based on the second focus of this study, the findings revealed that 31 data points fall under free speech, 17 under offensive, and 2 in the gray area, with no instances of hate speech identified. A key finding (novelty) in this study lies in the identification of the gray area, which highlights a zone of semantic ambiguity within Mens Rea humor. The two data points classified as gray area “MR/P/N/24” and “MR/P/N/43” demonstrate that a statement can cause moral harm through stereotyping or symbolic delegitimization without meeting the criteria for hate speech. As for the third focus of this study, it found that the discourse on Mens Rea has implications for the vitality of public discourse, strengthens the relationship between democracy and the law, and reinforces the role of humor as a means of criticism in a democracy.