Critical Analysis of Ganjar’s Speech Covid-19: A Constructed Political Identity

History: Received: 2020-09-29 Accepted: 2020-11-02 Published: 2020-12-26 This paper examines Ganjar Pranowo’s political identity through his linguistic features constructed through his speech for responding the case of some of Ungaran citizen’s refusal on accepting a Covid-19 patient’s remain body. The speech is analyzed with Fairclough’s CDA as the main framework of analysis. There are three dialectical stages to complete his framework, namely the text analysis, the interpretation of text analysis, and the explanation. The textual part of the analysis will be explained by using Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics. Meanwhile, the interpretation part will be examined by using Halliday’s appraisal system, and van Dijk’s political discourse analysis will analyze the explanation part. This article states that the interpretation analysis are both ‘judgement’ and ‘appreciation’ from Ganjar shows some degrees of positive polarity and other degrees of opposing polarity. The Ganjar’s political identity represented from his response-speech is humanitarian-oriented, socio-religiously aware, status quo holder, and as a part of the bigger political system’s discourse maker. In this case, response-speech could be selected and in line with the context of society need. Therefore, this article suggests that disaster management should not differentiate community identity on the one hand. The elite also could deliver the policies in a soft statement that is accepted by the public on the other hand.


Introduction
Covid-19 is a global phenomenon brought by the universe towards humanity early in 2020 (Sohrabi et al., 2020;Wu et al., 2020) hits everything without boundaries (Chirila, 2020;Benach, 2020;O'Sullivan et al., 2020) and somehow leads into a disaster (Alwi et al., 2017). This "magical" phenomenon incurred paramount if not wholistic shifting from the normal world to the new situation (Bhusal, 2020;Wajahat et al., 2020). This phenomenon reaches Indonesia (World Health Organization-Indonesia Situation Report 1., 2020), especially The Semarang Regency of Central Java (Iswinarno, 2020;Permana, 2020). As the capital city of Central Java Province, Semarang is somewhat leading the rate of the number of positive people who have tested positive for Covid-19 this September 2020 (Farasonalia, 2020;Hastuti, 2020;Mardiastuti, 2020). Six months prior from September, that is in April 2020, and there was a phenomenon called "the refusal of one of the health workers" (Garjito, 2020;Purba, 2020) in Ungaran Region, Semarang, as a response to the misinformed society and lack of government's reliable information concerning Covid-19 (Garjito, 2020). Due to the circulation of irresponsible information, the lack of literature society, the existence of certain provoking persons who influenced the mass psychology (Alwi et al., 2017) that might have unreasonable fear towards Covid-19 (Teo et al., 2020), the persecution toward the remain of the nurse (Malik, Dusep., Royanto, 2020;Widhana, 2020) happened as a way to protect themselves from the infectious outbreak (Freckelton QC, 2020). This phenomenon was somehow the result of the unprepared prevention of the outbreak by the highest authority (Almuttaqi, 2020;Ansori, 2020;Putri, 2020) compared to foreign countries which started earlier to prevent the worst (Ansori, 2020). The state officials show these underestimated practices then created poor communication and disorganization among the governmental bodies (Hanafi et al., 2020;Noor et al., 2020). It was clear that in the amid of disorganization shown by the government and the inconsistency of information delivered by the spoke person for the countermeasure of Covid-19 to the public (Noor et al., 2020), were might the factors of prejudices and fear of death threat among the society (Clissold et al., 2020;Freckelton QC, 2020), in this case, towards the health workers. In short, the reason why the citizen of Ungaran did that unethical action that is refusing the nurse's funeral in their village's cemetery was the result of prejudice due to the spread of fake news related to Covid-19 (Gagliardone et al., 2015;Moscadelli et al., 2020) and the probability buildup of public distrust for the higher authority (Honigsbaum, 2013).
The phenomenon above was triggering a response from Ganjar as the highest authority in Central Java. His short speech was being posted through his account of social media (Isnin, 2018) called Instagram. He conveyed his condolence and gratitude (Nurfajriani, 2020) towards the health workers who had already sacrificed their lives to rescue the covid-19 outbreak's patients (Nurfajriani, 2020) mostly who worked in Semarang. Beside condolence, he mentioned his twinge (heartbreak) in Javanese tatu ati to convey his lament of the action of several citizens of Ungaran to refuse that hero of humanity (Farasonalia, 2020). Still, in the same documentation, he requested his citizens to cease that unethical action repeatedly (Purba, 2020) and hoped that the citizens were not affected by wronged information (hoaxes) circulated without a credible source of information (Freckelton QC, 2020;Garjito, 2020) especially concerning covid-19.
Thus, based on the series of events above, this paper analyzes Ganjar's speech by using the method concept of CDA (Mair & Fairclough, 1997) which means incorporating the three frameworks of analysis, that are 1) text analysis, 2) interpretation of textual analysis, and 3) the explanation. The textual part, Fairclough argues, the text does correlate to the written or spoken language, although it does not necessarily limited to that extend (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). The function of the text within the critical discourse spectrum is what it is "within" the text that carries specific linguistic attributes as a mark of "bridge" among social events happening in the world. Fairclough departs by stating that critical discourse has ideally explained through Halliday's systemic functional linguistics (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004). There are three technical names to represent the metafunction system; they are 1) experiential (to construe experience), 2) interpersonal (to enact social relationships), and 3) textual (to create relevance to context) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004;Mair & Fairclough, 1997).
The interpretation analysis, as stated by Fairclough, is an essential part of critical discourse analysis, since the term discourse analysis alone has already been a higher subject to comprehend the role of texts in sociocultural praxis (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). Thus, the work of critical discourse analysis should be the interconnecting analysis of how text is produced, how the text is distributed, and how the text is consumed within the discursive events. This interpretation analysis may be including historical events which triggering some series of event, which, in turn, became the cause of the production of Ganjar's speech. It is a reasonable decision to include Halliday's appraisal system to draw a representation of Ganjar's attitude (polarity) on the front of the discursive events. The wording choices could be a depiction of Ganjar's appraisals, whether it is a judgement appraisal or appreciation appraisals. Based on (J. R Martin & White, 2005; James R; Martin & Rose, 2007), the appraisal is an evaluation system to assess attitude, judgement, and/or appreciation which are being given by Ganjar through his wording choices. The "judgement" relates to certain kind of attitude and evaluation given by Ganjar concerning animate objects (in this research is his systemic evaluation towards Ungaran citizen's attitude given to the health worker's funeral) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004). The "appreciation" relates to a certain kind of Ganjar's evaluation concerning inanimate object (in this case is the refusal of a funeral phenomenon) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004).
The third framework within this method is the explanation analysis between the relation of power or domination from certain social class and reproduction of domination that intertwined with existing ideology (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). The discussion about Ganjar's political identity may be correlated to ideological purposes (Abdi & Basarati, 2018;Retzlaff & Gänzle, 2008) to obtain legitimation from public consent within the range of socio-political affairs. In democratic sphere, where there is a periodic election for the public officials such as president or governor, identities as a fundamental part of ideology (van Dijk, 1998) are likely to be constructed socially and comprehended within the intertwined systems of discourse representation (De Fina, 2006). A person could engineer his identity to present distinguished aspects of his identity (Edu-Buandoh, 2016). The certain thing about identity is that it is a constructed interacting social practice. At the same time, the construction of identity in discourse is deeply rooted in the socio-historical praxis (Alemi et al., 2018). The correlation between identity and legitimation in Ganjar representation during Covid-19 pandemic, Braker (2004) (in Abdi & Basarati, 2018) stated that the concept of identity is an essential aspect in perceiving legitimation act. He stated "The identity at the same time legitimates the person, and is confirmed by the person's manner of expressing it. Legitimation and identification are in that sense dimensions of the inextricably intermeshed activity or pattern of activities. At the same time, the identification between rulers and the people to whom the commands are issued serves to legitimate compliance with commands." (p. 35) Concerning to the inseparable relationship between the concept of legitimation and identity, Baker also mentioned, "legitimation is making sense of power, … to those who exercise power; to those who are subject to the exercise of power; or to both" (Braker, 2004, p.37 in Abdi & Basarati, 2018. and mentioned, "the formation of institutional identities justifies the exercise of power and describes the ways and ends of its use" (Braker, 2004, p. 38 in Abdi & Basarati, 2018. A critical analysis of power, based on van Dijk view (van Dijk, 2008), is an interrelation of social groups, institutions or organizations. Thus, social power is defined as the terms to control the action, the minds, the knowledge, attitudes, or ideologies. Power of a specific group or institution, based on van Dijk terminology, can be `distributed' or be restricted to a specific social domain or scope, that resulting in different power or elite groups who able to control the domain. Dominance is a form of abusing the socio-power that is illegitimately controlled over others in a certain person's interests, often resulting in social inequality (van Dijk, 1989(van Dijk, , 2008. It is important to emphasize the relevance of controlling the cognitive dimension. Power abuse does not only involve the abuse of force but significantly may affect the minds of people. Hence, by controlling over the certain domain of public discourse and communication, dominant groups or institutions may influence the order of text and talk in a specific way so that they may affect the dominated group's knowledge, attitudes, norms, values and ideologies (van Dijk, 2008).
The concept of power in democratic sphere based on van Dijk is "persuasive and somewhat manipulative, rather than appear as coercive (using of force), or incentives, such as the explicit commands, orders, threats, or economic sanctions". Hence, discourse plays an essential role in developing the consent of others. It is an essential task of CDA to discuss the precise cognitive patterns and tactics that play out in the social cognitions of groups. In short, what does involve here is the manipulation of mental models of social events by using specific discourse orders, such as topical structures, headlines, semantic strategies, and other tactics. In case the readers or listeners possess the access to alternative information or other mental resources as counter-expectant to such persuasive messages, the result of such manipulation may be the formation of desirable models of specific (and somewhat avoided) situation, which may in turn to more general, desirable knowledge, attitudes or ideologies for those who have counter-persuasive access of information (van Dijk, 1993(van Dijk, , 2006(van Dijk, , 2008. Concerning "alternative information source" such as in media discourse, social media has become a new source of information (Gil De Zúñiga et al., 2009;Mair & Fairclough, 1997) where the public put their trust concerning many issues from politics, economics, educations, until health, social media has changed the behavior of the public in consuming information (Zúñiga et al., 2013) and it becomes the primary medium to convey all interests or messages from all actors, including the unidentified ones (Kovach, B., Rosenstiel, 2010). In the era of mass consumption of social media, where the freedom of expression is highly upheld (Weeks et al., 2017), there must be specific points of its downfall to humanity. From the pre-eminence perspective, the social media or virtual media could be a vast yet relatively cheap platform to propagate enlighten information (Weeks et al., 2017) from anyone to everybody and this virtual media could be benefiting to those who use it wisely, especially to those who want to promote their identity to the public in order to garner sympathy from the public, which now become a usual norm in society. One of the media social downfalls is the production of hoaxes or fake news (Moscadelli et al., 2020), the undeniable-circulated-irresponsible-information. Theses hoaxes or fake news may end up being circulated vastly within the public. Individuals become more and more dependent towards social media due to the behavioral shifting in consuming, producing, distributing, and creating the contents in every social media platform in the era of industrial revolution 4.0 (Weeks et al., 2017).

Method of Interpretation of Ganjar's Speech: A Critical Discourse Approach
Language is a psychological tool to deliver a message and an indication of intention (Williams, 2020). As stated in the paragraph above, this research uses Fairclough's methodological framework under the banner of critical discourse analysis (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). This framework is an interrelated analysis from fundamental linguistic analysis into the complex relation of ideology and power. The first framework is a textual analysis which functioning as the fundamental departing point of discussion to avoid untouchable extension of analysis (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). This framework has a close relation to Halliday's systemic functional linguistic which has three-points of departures; they are transitivity system (clause as representation), mood system (clause as an exchange), and theme system (clause as message) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004;Mair & Fairclough, 1997). Thus, the textual analysis included the combination of the transitivity system, mood system, and theme system to identify the kind of processes experienced by the agency within this research (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004).
The interpretation analysis deals with how the text is being reproduced, how the text is being distributed, and how the text is being consumed in a discursive event (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). It correlates with the series of discursive events in historical sequences to show how each discursive event takes place and triggers series of discursive events that may be played out in the future (Mair & Fairclough, 1997). These dialectic relations are explained with Halliday's appraisal system, specifically the term judgement and appreciation. The polarity of the agency, which is Ganjar in this case, will also be revealed through this lens of lexical polarity (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004, 2013. Last but not least, the explanation analysis. This explanation deals with a higher and broader scope of discussion, which includes the domain of ideology, power, the domination of the social class, and political identity.

The Textual Findings of Ganjar's Speech
The textual analysis focuses on the kinds of utterances used by Ganjar to convey his intention towards the addressee, in this case, is the refusal of funeral phenomenon situated in one of the Ungaran village, Semarang city. Table 1 is the finding of metafunction usage within the speech.

Closing greeting
The findings above show that the theme of the text which correlates to the context bapak-ibu as the Ungaran citizen who refuses the funeral. The major type of sentence which are used by Ganjar are declarative sentences, then imperative sentences, and exclamative sentences. The declarative ones indicate Ganjar's intention to equip the citizen with correct information related to the safety procedure taken to treat the patient of Covid-19 and the characteristic of the virus which does not become contagious once the host's died, so the remaining body of Covid-19 patient is saved. The imperative ones indicate Ganjar's emphasis to stop the mistreatment for the Covid-19 patients, especially for those who are health workers. The exclamative sentences indicate Ganjar's request to reflect the production of unqualified actions by some of Ungaran citizens towards the patient's funeral. Besides, he indicates a request for forgiveness and sending prayer from those who are health workers as he is the representative of Central Java's citizens.
The findings that indicate processes which are used by Ganjar are a material process to represent the actions of actors within the text such as the action of a specific group in one of Ungaran village who refuses a funeral of Covid-19 patient; to represent the action of specific experts in arrangement the patient's remain body; to represent the expert's statement related to the contagious virus will be perished once the host has died; to represent the fatwa of Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesian Ulama Council) related to the mandatory burial for fellows Muslims, and to represent the struggle and the sacrifice of the health workers to save other lives. The relational process findings in the text above are mostly correlated to material process as a further explanation from the actions. The verbal processes are mostly acted out as requests towards the citizens to uphold humanity, and as requests towards the health workers to forgive the mistreatment they received. Lastly, the mental process addresses the citizen explicitly to think about their action and questions whether or not it is appropriate to celebrate.

Prayudisti Shinta Pandanwangi, Nurhayati, Zuly Qodir: Critical Analysis of Ganjar's Speech Covid-19: A Constructed Political Identity
-164 - The findings on modalities (adverb) which Ganjar used are propositional of morality such as displaying humanity to express less-morally action; adverbs of counterexpectancy exceeding such as break a heart to express undesirable code of conduct; proposition of assertiveness such as being respectful or hero of humanity to express empathetic nature of humanity that should be appeared in any situation; high degree intensity of persuasive concessions such as inserting quotes from MUI or experts in this field to oblige the society to accept the patient's burial; qualifying the validity such as inserting expert's quotes and emphasis the validity of the information of safety procedures; and propositional of desirability such as Ganjar's hope this case will be the last phenomenon ever to exist.

The Interpretation of Ganjar's Appraisals
The previous discussion was all about the textual encryption and description of Ganjar Pranowo's wording choices in his social media and how each word he produced could interplay his action, his identity, and his position as a Governor of Central Java, and most importantly, on how he interpreted the series of discursive events as a political leader in disposition (Isnin, 2018). In short, we can find that Ganjar used a balanced amount of judgement and appreciation within his speech, as shown in table 2. Yang terakhir kali as his (negative) appreciation to the phenomenon and hoped it to be last time Mendoakan as his judgement to the safety of the health workers Seringkali memecah belah masyarakat as his (negative) appreciation to the wronged information or hoaxes which usually become the trigger of disunity within the society Mengharap maaf as his judgment to the wronged treatment from some of his citizen -In the perspective of appraisal-judgement, Ganjar focuses on evaluating two things, that is the attitude of several citizens in Ungaran and the value of the nurse's remain in his viewpoint. At the beginning of his speech, he gave his evaluation towards his citizen, especially some of the Ungaran citizen, by expressing the Javanese term of humanity to indirectly giving an order of reflection on their wrongdoing. This approach may be used to lessen the degree of coerciveness manner. Instead of expressing a blaming, these kinds of expressions may be resulting in less turbulence in the society while at the same, he still able to address monition/ assertive warning. His composed attitude should be maintained in every situation, especially in a time of crisis (or pandemic) (Freckelton QC, 2020;Lu, 2015). In other words, his choice of words was an attempt to maintain a calm atmosphere while kept the situation under control.
The next evaluation of judgement given by Ganjar is the hero of humanity to represent the nurse's choice to sacrifice her life to treat patients of covid-19. This judgement is a representation of professional attitude from the nurse, and Ganjar uses this expression to emphasis that she is worth to be appreciated in any ways possible. In other words, Ganjar as a governor tries to escort the public's appraisement to give credits towards the nurse and other health workers since they have already sacrificed their lives (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004;J.R Martin & White, 2005). He mentions the word hero to express the health workers' struggles to treat their patients. Beside hero, he mentions the characteristic of the health workers deserves a high appreciation that is as equal as their services.
The reason beyond Ganjar's statement of "never rejecting patients" may be lies within the fact that in general, every health worker such as a nurse, doctor, midwife, etc. takes the profession oath (AR, 2020) before they are officially on duty. One of the verses within the medical oath stated, as a health worker, they shall not distinguish their patient based on the wealth, status, race, religion, etc. and treat the patient equally based on the patient's need. Their consistency to hold the oath unwaveringly is something that should be honoured based on Ganjar's appraisal-judgement (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004). In return, he mentions that the action of some citizens who refuse the nurse's funeral is merely heartless. Therefore, the judgement given by Ganjar is an assertive-persuasive attitude towards them (J. R Martin & White, 2005). Last but not least, he requests the citizen to send a prayer for the health workers, and asks for forgiveness from the whole health workers for the wrongdoings of his citizens.
In the perspective of appraisal -appreciation (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004), Ganjar focuses on evaluating three things; they are the refusal phenomenon, the procedure of burial Covid-19 patient, and the false information which is irresponsibly circulating within the society. Ganjar's evaluation on the burial-refusing phenomenon has negative polarity indicated by the phrase I received a surprising report and later, he evaluates the surprising report with the expression a phenomenon which may be breaking heart or causing writhe for those who receive similar doing. This negative assessment could be seen in the word sinful to represent the morally-less action. He hopes that this phenomenon will not emerge in the future ever again. Another negative evaluation of the phenomenon is his emphasis on the burial procedure, which has already done by following Islamic procedure and the medical safety procedure towards the patient. He indicates (James R; Martin & Rose, 2007) assurance that the remain is saved by mentioning MUI as the highest Islamic authoritative council in Indonesia (Pabbajah et al., 2020) which has been issuing a fatwa in regards of the pandemic situation. In short, he evaluates (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004) that the procedure to bury a Covid-19 patient is saved.
In regards to the factors on why the citizen refuses the Covid-19 patient's funeral, Ganjar evaluates the involvement variable of false information or hoaxes plays a significant contribution within this phenomenon. He reflects that hoaxes often create disunity within society. In this case, hoaxes may compose (Paakkari & Okan, 2020) disrupted information, and may construct false comprehension of information in the society concerning the virus. This false construction of comprehension, at the end of the day, is affecting the perspective of the society in constructing their decision whether to appreciate the Covid-19 patient's funeral or to refuse (as a result of fear) the patient by assuming they are infectious and dangerous (Freckelton QC, 2020). Assuming things before attempting to gather trusted information may create prejudice and jeopardy series of events. In short, he warns his citizen to avoid spreading false information.

Critical Analysis of Ganjar's Speech: A Constructed Political Identity
As the Governor of Central Java, Ganjar appears as a reachable type of leader who is often doing interaction with the public through his social media accounts. This interaction is part of his engineered identity to show to the public sphere. Besides, Ganjar's Identity, as being negotiated within reciprocal social action to contexts, and is exhibited in correlation to others in a cultural community by acts and emotions (McKinley, 2015;Warren, 2019), it contributes the discourses to organize the society into socially pertinent aspects. The act of Ganjar to deliver his speech through his private Instagram account in responding this phenomenon shows that he wants the psycho-emotional engagement to the society to create a sense of closeness, to the citizen was more comfortable to regulate. Psycho-emotional engagement or sense of closeness (Abdullah, 2020) is vital to maintain a sustainable hegemony within the domain of political authority, especially in a further political election to sustain his political career. In short, his self-image is the engineering of identification with synthetic identities within various discourses (Burr, 2003). Hence, this kind of social engineering or association enables the authority to manage legitimate execution and to create sustainable hegemony.
In the case of Ganjar, the way he represents himself within the video shows the power of the persuasive approach to admonish his citizen's wrongdoing by entitling the safety procedure of the nurse's burial based on the medical procedure and Islamic syari'ah. The mentioning of Islamic syari'ah and MUI is an initial attempt to persuade the society by manipulating the influence of Ulama to control the society since the majority of Indonesian citizens are Muslims (Taufani, 2015). At a certain level, the decision of Ulamas may have a powerful impact towards their followers (Pabbajah et al., 2020). He intends to establish certain political identity in Indonesia's socio-political discourse by including Islamic terminologies such as purification to the remain, in syar'i perspective, sinful action, the MUI institution, and the ulama as charismatic religious leaders to create a degree of closeness that maybe attract voter's sympathy or even public trust (Nasrudin, 2018). In democratic sphere such as Indonesia, garnering the sympathy from the public or garnering public trust is something crucial in sustaining one's political career or political domination. In short, Ganjar's identity may be seen as intertwined relations that able to provide persuasive approach and yet, still able to provide an instrument to classify the structures of society in order to legitimizing the status quo (Bradford et al., 2017). He was able to point out to the society which action was right while at the same time, he showed which area of action was wrong (Gerber & Jackson, 2017). This demeanour shows the power to create structure appropriation to the status quo. Thus, he appears as status quo holder and at the same time, he able to control the dynamic social situations amid the pandemic turbulence.
The most notable act of legitimation is to establish, condone, and institutionalize specific institutional distinctness, principles, and orders (Abdi & Basarati, 2018). As stated by (Deutsch, 1963), legitimacy is the conviction of the suitability of principlepursuing acts with other fundamental principles. Based on (Cap, 2006) legitimation is generally seen as the vital target of a political speaker demand to justify pattern of actions that are expected to be exercised within the scope of the pressing concerns of the addressee (Abdi & Basarati, 2018). Hence, when Ganjar made a statement concerning the safety procedure of Covid-19 patient's funeral from both medical procedure and Islamic procedure, he expected the citizen to rationalize their thinking as it was not infectious. It was the norm. As profoundly embedded to ideology, legitimation implies canons and standards; hence, it implies that some acts, verdict, or policy are acceptable within a given law or political system (Abdi & Basarati, 2018;van Dijk, 1998). In this case, the way Ganjar mentioned "hoax" as triggering point of this unethical action was marked as the value he imposed to the mind of the society, so whenever the society was accepting certain information, the valid ones should be aligned with the information from the government. The inclusion of religious authority such as MUI is a way to maintain the public trust towards the government amid the current wave of public distrust (Hanafi et al., 2020) as the effect from previous aspects. The validity of certain information or series of acts is what we called legitimacy because legitimating justifications that served for specific series of acts is about how certain political actor sees the reality and validates the acceptable legitimacy (Abdi & Basarati, 2018;van Dijk, 1998).

Conclusion
The findings within the textual analysis are three keys: 1) the use of the theme system which correlates to the context, declarative sentences, then imperative sentences, and exclamative sentences; 2) The use material process to represent the actions of actors within the text; The use of relational process findings in the text above are mostly correlated to material process as a further explanation from the actions; The use of verbal processes as requests towards the citizens to uphold humanity; the mental process to reflect appropriate action; 3) The use of modalities (adverb) propositional of morality; adverbs of counter-expectancy exceeding; proposition of assertiveness; high degree intensity of persuasive concession; qualifying the validity; and propositional of desirability.
The findings within the interpretation analysis are both 'judgement', and 'appreciation' from Ganjar shows some degrees of positive polarity and other degrees of opposing polarity. The positive polarity is shown when he evaluates the health workers part, the procedure of the burial part, and his hope for perishing immoral action in the future. The negative polarity is shown when he evaluates the refusal act of the patient's remain body.
The findings within the explanation analysis are an assertive-persuasive type of leader indicated by he delivers his evaluation through the message, a socio-religious aware of maintaining the socio-political situation under control by manipulating the narration of religious-friendly and humanitarian-closeness, and plays as one of the more significant parts of the existing system which defend the status quo or maintain the structure of discourse amid the emergence of public distrust towards the government in all level of authority.