CO-CONSTRUCTING DIGITAL COMMEMORATION ON FACEBOOK DURING REUNIFICATION DAY

Quy Nguyen Duc

doi:10.33197/ejlutama.v10i2.359

Penulis

Quy Nguyen Duc Thanh Do University, Viet Nam

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33197/ejlutama.v10i2.359

Kata Kunci:

Critical discourse analysis, digital commemoration, digital linguistic ethnography, Facebook, key opinion leaders

Abstrak

Vietnam’s reunification day has increasingly been commemorated through social media, where remembrance extends beyond official institutions to include influential digital figures and public participation. Although previous studies have examined digital memory and influencer communication, limited attention has been paid to how Vietnamese key opinion leaders (KOLs) and their audiences collaboratively construct commemorative discourse during nationally significant events. This study investigates how Vietnamese KOLs and their audiences co-construct digital commemoration on Facebook during the 50th anniversary of Vietnam’s reunification day. A qualitative corpus-based design was employed to analyse 32 Facebook posts published by 13 prominent KOLs and 160 highly engaged audience comments using an integrated framework of critical discourse analysis and digital linguistic ethnography. The findings reveal that KOLs construct commemorative meanings through evaluative language, personalised storytelling, and multimodal symbolism, while audiences actively participate through expressions of alignment, emotional resonance, reflection, and occasional critique. These interactions demonstrate that commemorative meanings are continuously negotiated through linguistic choices, visual resources, and platform-mediated engagement. Digital commemoration on Facebook functions as a dynamic and participatory process in which influencers and audiences jointly shape public memory, extending current understanding of digital commemoration, influencer-mediated discourse, and online civic engagement in contemporary Vietnam.

Referensi

Abidin, C. (2016). Visibility labour: Engaging with influencer culture on social media. Media International Australia, 161(1), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X16665177

Androutsopoulos, J. (2014). Mediatization and sociolinguistic change: Key concepts, research traditions, open issues. In J. Androutsopoulos, Mediatization and Sociolinguistic Change (pp. 3-48). De Gruyter.

Azer, J., Blasco-Arcas, L., & Alexander, M. (2023). Visual modality of engagement: Conceptualization, typology of forms, and outcomes. Journal of Service Research, 27(2), 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705231190867

Birkner, T., & Donk, A. (2018). Collective memory and social media: Fostering a new historical consciousness in the digital age? Memory Studies, 13(4), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698017750012

Fairclough, N. (1993). Discourse and Social Change. Wiley.

Hoskins, A. (2014). The Mediatization of Memory. In K. Lundby, Mediatization of Communication (pp. 661-679). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110272215.661

Kress, G., & Leeuwen, T. V. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Arnold.

Le, H. (2022). How do the influencing factors of key opinion leaders (KOLs) on social networks affect Vietnamese consumers’ purchase intention? Proceedings of the RSU International Research Conference 2022 (pp. 251-269). Rangsit University. https://doi.nrct.go.th/admin/doc/doc_621867.pdf

Machin, D. (2013). Visual communication. De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255492

Marwick, A., & Boyd, D. (2011). To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter. Convergence, 17(2), 139-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856510394539

Page, R. (2012). The linguistics of self-branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags. Discourse & Communication, 6(2), 181-201. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481312437441

Reading, A. (2011). Memory and Digital Media: Six Dynamics of the Globital Memory Field. In M. Neiger, O. Meyers, & E. Zandberg, On Media Memory. Palgrave Macmillan Memory Studies (pp. 241–252). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230307070_18

Rohadi, T., & Sugaryamah, D. (2024). What matter in students’ analysing current issues posted in Twitter written in Indonesian and English? English Journal Literacy Utama, 8(2), 142–151. https://doi.org/10.33197/ejlutama.v8i2.261

Shen, B., Wen, Q., & Zhou, Y. (2023). The influence of Key Opinion Leader’s attitudes toward netizens on public opinion. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media, 3, 36-43. https://doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/3/2022451

Stepaniuk, K. (2024). Social media content multimodality and the level of user interactions from the perspective of Facebook and Instagram. Engineering Economics, 35(5), 579–593. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.35.5.36677

Tran, M. D., Ta, K. P., Luu, H. T., Ta, N. B., Vo, M. Y., & Pham, A. S. (2025). Effect of KOLs’ persuasiveness on impulsive buying behaviors: live streaming commerce. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2476709

van Dijck, J. (2007). Mediated Memories in the Digital Age. Stanford University Press.

van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Sage.

Wodak, R. (2014). Critical discourse analysis. In C. Leung, & B. V. Street, The Routledge Companion to English Studies (pp. 302–316). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315852515