Clash of Civilization in the News Reality Construction of the Anti- Ahok Rally in Kompas and Republika Newspapers

- The rally of around two million Muslims in Jakarta in November 2016 protesting against alleged religious defamation committed by Jakarta Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama made the headlines in Indonesian mainstream newspapers; Kompas and Republika. However, both newspapers came out with different perspectives in accordance with their ideological background. Therefore, these differences lead to the question of whether they would trigger a clash of civilization as pointed by S. Huntington stating that the vast post-cold war conflicts would be represented by Western Civilization, China Civilization, and Islam Civilization. This study formulates the problems including: (1) How is the clash of civilization built through the symptoms constructed in Kompas and Republika newspapers? and; (2) How do the intertextual aspects build the clash of civilization semiotically through the texts of the news in Kompas and Republika related to the November 4, 2016 rally? The paradigm used is the critical paradigm with qualitative approach, while the data are analyzed by using Kristeva Semiotic Method. The results of the research include; the mass media has been a field of the symbolic war among civilizations, meaning that the clash of civilizations on media is manifested through the symbolic conflict upheaval operated semiotically by Kompas and Republika. The news of November 4, 2016 rally in both newspapers serves as a battlefield of meanings as well as the field of a clash of civilizations.


Introduction
The government of President Joko Widodo and Vice President Jusuf Kalla had to deal with a kind of temptation when approximately two million Muslims in Jakarta on November 4, 2016 staged a rally to protest against the government's slowness in dealing with the case of blasphemy involving Jakarta Governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, known as Ahok.
Jokowi, as Joko Widodo is popularly called, and Basuki have typical relations, since Basuki was Jokowi's deputy when they won the Jakarta gubernatorial election in 2012. When Joko Widodo was elected the President of the Republic of Indonesia in 2014, he relinquished the post of Jakarta governor, allowing Basuki to take the helm of the capital city.
Basuki is a controversial figure in the Indonesian politics because of his unconventional statements spoken to the people even to his political opponents (Puspitasari, 2018). His controversy climaxed when he quoted the Holy Quran, Epistle of Al-Maidah verse 51 in Seribu Islands on September 28, 2016.
That verse forbids Muslims to elect a non-Muslim leader, and Basuki associated it with his position as the incumbent governor who also sought re-election to a second term (2017)(2018)(2019)(2020)(2021)(2022) 't matter.(http://news.detik.com/berita/3315674/k ontroversiahok-soal-al-maidah-ayat-51) Basuki's speech stating that "dibohongin pakai Surat Al Maidah 51" sparked anger among Muslims because these phrases are regarded as a defamation of Islam. Although Basuki has offered an apology, it did not help ease their anger. On the other hand, the government seemed to protract the naming of Basuki as a suspect in the blasphemy case a month after the massive demonstration took place.
The November 4, 2016 rally, known as an Action of Defending Islam, or the 411 action, generated news stories with different perspectives on two Indonesian mainstream newspapers; Kompas and Republika. Kompas was traditionally founded by the followers of Catholic, while Republika was originated by the Muslims.
The November 4, 2016 rally made the headlines on the two newspapers on November 5, 2016, yet with a different perspective. Kompas appeared with its headline: "President: Political Actors Ride" or Presiden: Aktor Politik Menunggangi, while Republika wrote "Action of Dignity" or Aksi Bermartabat (figure 1).
The feud of the agenda of both media, by observing their ideological background, raises a question of whether this case would trigger a Clash of Civilization in Indonesia. The purposes of this research are: (1) to present the reality construction made by Kompas and Republika dailies on the 411 action; (2) to explain the clash of civilizations built through reality construction in both newspapers; (3) to create a theoretical proposition related to the clash of civilization theory model in semiotic analysis involving the construction of reality in the form of sign(s) in the media related to the action 411.

Theoretical Frameworks
As a pluralistic country which comprises various ethnic groups, religions, languages and cultures, Indonesia is vulnerable to internal collisions between civilizations. This motivates us to see the phenomenon of "clash of civilization" in the context of the Indonesian social system through the construction of the reality of the 411 rallyrelated news stories. The clash among civilizations in Indonesia containing diaspora from the world's great civilization will find its place when the media enliven religious-based conflicts, and race, because people are always looking for information that affirms their beliefs (Riyanto, 2016;Eriyanto et. al, 2003).
On the other hand, the mass media in Indonesia today tend to be a political tool for their owners (Rachmiatie, 2016), as well as a tool for building ideological aims (Ritonga, 2014;Ritonga, 2019).
Media behavior in Indonesia is in line with Media Dependency Theory of Ball-Rokeach and DeFleur (Selo, et al, 2015) which states the media will increasingly become influential when the audience is very dependent on the particular media. In fact, journalistic subjectivity always arises when they make news (Ramli, et al. 2015). Thus, the potential of hidden conflicts can occur when the root of the conflict is continually reported by the media (Seib, 2004). Barthes (1977) tried to analyze Panzani pasta advertisement. This analysis was copied based on the consideration that the texts in this research are visual texts with "linguistic" element that certainly have more visual language. Ads tend to use a lot of visual language, for example, the Panzani ad that uses photo and writing as the elements of the message. This can be applied as the analysis "metaphor" of other visual messages, as well as a journalistic photo that owns the same elements of visual and perhaps verbal messages. In his essay, Barthes conducted his analysis since he was trying to build the linguistic units in a text applying visual elements like in Panzani (McQuail, 2010;McQuail, 2012).
Barthes' analysis elements are divided into three linguistic messages, the encoded iconic message, and non-encoded iconic message (Barthes, 2010). First, the linguistic messages are the whole words and the verbal language in a text; in this case, Barthes implements them in the ads, therefore, certainly, the copy writing text of the ads works as the element. Meanwhile, a journalistic photo includes caption or writing, graffiti, and calligraphy that might be contained in the text of the image. Second, the encoded iconic message is the denotation of a text; in this case, how the denotation constructed by the visual symbols without being associated with linguistic symbols or codes. This is a kind of interpretation of the visual contained in a journalistic photo, and it will be associated with the interpretation of the visual form on a journalistic photo. Third, the non-encoded iconic message is a connotation on Barthes' terminology.
In the Panzani ad analysis, Barthes combines the interpretation of two previous message elements as one form of interpretation, which then generates the explanation of meaning on connotation level. The second analysis in Kristeva's semi-analysis is genotext analysis. It refers to the historical evolution of languages and various semiotical practices in the past, in the present and in the future (Budiman, 1999: 41). This phase of analysis explains transposition through the disclosure of historical facts, and the intertextual facts will semiotically reveal the hidden structure of a text.

Material and Methodology
This study uses the critical paradigm, and in general terms, critical paradigm refers to the critical theoretical spirit underlying the ideas on social regulation in the context of power. The distribution of resources that is not appropriate with the authority is in line with Marx's ideas regarding the concept of alienation based on the working-class division in capitalist society (Guba, 1990).
The approach applied in this study is the qualitative approach, while the data collection and analysis use the Kristeva Semiotic Method, socalled Kristeva's Semi-analysis. The method is divided into two phases of analysis element of semi-analysis, namely, phenotext analysis; this analysis targets the semantic structure of texts and the configuration of symbols (Noth, 2001).
Fundamentally, the phenotext includes the whole phenomenon of the characteristics owned by the language structure, which means, in this case, the text is viewed as a useful language unit for communication in certain representational forms. For this analysis, Kristeva does not specifically provide her analysis tools. However, in this study, to see the level of the phenomena, Roland Barthes' image analysis is operated.

Clash of Civilization Theory
The future politics is the world of potential conflicts. Clash of civilization, as a theory, has demonstrated the political relationship among the great civilizations that is afterwards creating a clash of cultural conflict. Samuel P. Huntington conceptualizes this phenomenon in a perspective theory of a clash of civilization (Huntinghon, 1996). This theory is derived from a number of assumptions.
The first one is the waning dominance of Western civilization while the other civilizations' dominance increases. The confidence and commitment of non-westerns' local culture is getting greater (Huntinghon, 1996). Second, the rise of social, political and economic sectors of non-western civilizations. Huntington says that the economic rise of Asian and some Islamic countries will evoke or increase the weaponry strength that triggers similarity or balanced of power among civilizations (Huntinghon, 1996). Third, the politics of identity is the unification of individuals and the nations that have cultural similarities; on the other hand, individuals from different cultures and nations are being apart (Huntinghon, 1996).
Therefore, the existence of identity poles are based on religions, cultures and races appeared beyond the old limit, as what had happened in the Cold War. Fourth, the human nature growing from the biological and psychological instinct shows that humans need enemy (Huntinghon, 1996). The common enemy is emerged by the civilizations standing on the same basis. Western civilization is the common enemy of the other civilizations; on the contrary, the 'silent' civilizations are getting aware because of the common enemy and similar interests.
From such assumptions, the clash of civilization theory describes several cases: (1) the great civilizations will converge in one great pole. According to Huntington, the rising conflict and clash tendency are quite possible, moreover, it can be raised through the Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance and arrogance of China and Korea (Huntinghon, 1996); (2) The effort of helping each of particular civilizations in the escalation of conflicts (Huntinghon, 1996). The power of the states in the same civilizations would help each other in the clash. This is also influenced by diasporic strength or groups of the same civilization by assisting the parties or poles of the same civilization. The model scheme below explains how the civilizations assist each other to increase the escalation of certain conflict.  Figure 2, the A1 and B1 civilizations are in a conflict. The other parties (A2, A3, and B2, B3) with similar interest, culture and race as the basic elements of civilization assist each other both in terms of material; logistics, weapons, and in terms of immaterial in the forms of media coverage, dissemination of messages, symbols and so forth. This model gives a description that the poles of civilizations will unite the existing forces that have long been scattered.
The civilizations and the diasporic groups turn into the new poles, conflicting each other; for example, the Muslim communities scattered around the world appear into one voice and support each other as Myanmar committed genocide against Rohingya Muslims throughout September 2016. Muslims around the world supported them and criticized such action. Another example is when diasporic Chinese encourages the China new geopolitical agendas around the world, specifically in the triangle region of Southeast Asia such as South China Sea and Indonesia; (3) Clash of civilization will not stop permanently. Conflicts based on culture, religion and race (civilization) will take place continuously which is called by Huntington as being off again on again for conflicts essentially exist in every group, state, and individual.

Media, Field, and Clash of Civilization
In a classic way, media is considered as a powerful institution which is able to construct public opinion. It is, at least, a popular assumption in mass society discourse adopted by many communication experts. However, in other condition, media is not viewed as that, but it is viewed as configuration of symbol, a social capital configuration which is consumed by public in essence mean and culture sharing. This happened through language as a media which Bourdieu regarded as cultural capital (Swartz, 1997).
Cultural capitol in Bourdieu perspective leads to all of internalized thing by individual through popularization process so that it achieved a scheme from certain understanding and accomplishment (Swartz, 1997). Bourdieu included all verbal facilities including media in this understanding (Swartz, 1997) so that media, in this view, is understood as a capital cultural.
This assumption constructed by Bourdieu regarding the theory of field, conflict is fundamental dynamics in social life. Field is a conception with conflict or social relations which construct conflict mode in certain position in a field. According to Bourdieu, field denoted an arena for production, circulation, provision of goods, service, knowledge and competitive position from an actor who struggle and seizure to accumulate different capital (Swartz, 1997). In this way, media as field become an important ride for a clash between ideological interests and civilization to build or take control a certain position in cultural domination. Theoretically, media is a symbolic system and cultural through the use of language correlate a person to another. By media, civilization is manifested and paraphrased. In this context, media can be viewed as a field for clash of civilization.
The assumption regarding media as the field from clash of civilizations is based on several factors. First, media as reality construction. Reality construction theory which was conceptualized by Berger is its preposition. This preposition stated sign was only a construction then it was objectified to portray divided reality (reality construction) or substituted by different person (Berger, 1979). Media is a configuration of sign system that signifier in media is a reality construction. This construction is intentional, not incidental, because there are stakeholders who construct a certain view of assumption related to their interest. Therefore, to construct a semiotic relation which is mere capital symbolic is to seize domination from every underlying civilization. By that means, civilization constructs cultural view by the content of mass media.
Secondly, media as cultural capital is a contested resource by power towards symbols and language which are able to construct viewpoints in accordance with the will of the authority. Thirdly, civilization showed its existence in affirmation of signs that signs of culture identity will be present and clashed in the dialectic of media through culture poles and direct intervention to the content of the media. Fourth, civilization and nations, individual or its support groups are distinctive filter mechanism for the existence of the content of media. Chomsky in media propaganda theory explained that one of the filters which affected media operation is ownership (Herman, 1988). The ownership media which is popular as representation or domination of certain civilization could have a construction of certain symbols. Therefore, what is seen as media warfare basically is warfare between civilization symbols.
A study conducted by Kperogi (2013) exhibited two dominate position in Nigerian Miss World issue on UK conservative newspaper and liberal newspaper. The conservative media showed that it was in the same direction as the concept of clash of civilization in reporting the issue.
This perspective (not always) appears in news regarding Islam versus West or West versus Non-West. It seems that there is a tendency by using clash of civilization media from media which embraced certain ideologies. It means that the tendency of civilization which brings certain ideology constructs its existence in media opinions within its groups.

a. Kristeva's Semiotics Theory
Kristeva argued that sign system is not a simple system. It was a result from many sources and motives. According to her, intertextuality meant transposition from several sign systems to another sign system. Every labelling is a field from transposition originated from various sign systems (McAfee, 2004) so that the implication of every signifier is basically a place for speech denoting this complicated object, not singular, incomplete and not identical -with the object of sign-is always plural, scattered and able to be treated (McAfee, 2004). The mean of signs is not necessarily appeared because of linear link of signifiers but this link is constructed based on what Bakhtin called as polivocality, in which sign produces meaning in the changing of sign system and in the sign movements to other phenomenon and system.
Text is a layered mosaic from quotations constructing dialogic and polyphonic structure (Noth, 2001). Text was never been or stood as a single sign system, it is an assembly of previous texts and codes. Text absorbs and transforms sign from the past to recent text and will be a particle for upcoming text. There are two essences stated by Kristeva, namely labelling practice and productivity (Noth, 2001). Labelling practice explained how a sign is within dialectic activity has many meanings between different actors, whereas productivity concerns how production or the formation of pattern and labelling sign was based on the evolution of linguistic and the evolution of labelling itself.
Production in this sense is how psychological traits and its constructor are trying to be active in producing a sign to be a functional sign. In this sense, Kristeva reclined to Freud's psychoanalysis argument: how the sign worksalso every symptom which construct it-is labelling itself (Noth, 2001). Its implication not only how the sign is interpreted but it is more to how sign is produced in evolve way and what reasons and desires which motivated its production.
It means that it is not only within dyadic notation but actually it has the quality of omni-historic and evolving.
In this theory, sign in media related to November 4 news is not necessarily a sign configuration representing that event. However, the November 4 event as sign is a transposition from sign system or others phenomenon. It means that the news is the pinnacle of reality shift from past text or past phenomenon so that all of the phenomena regarding transposition of sign system have to be dismantled to find hidden meaning or patterns and other relations to view its depiction.

b. Clash of Civilization Frame in Text Construction
The following provides the construction of linguistic message published in Kompas and Republika on November 5, 2016 regarding November 4 event.
The semiotic analysis on media linguistic content in Kompas daily, Novmber 5, 2016 as follows: Political actors ride has an interpretation of political and authority element. The word "ride" refers to an iconic phenomenon, mounting a horse or mounting animals which have close meaning as livestock, slaves, couldn't move itself, insincere. It means the rally is not someone's action but it is conducted by malevolent political actors and that it is against the law. This title has a denotation, leading to the meaning of November 4 rally specifically criminality, against the law and government, controlled by a group of people categorized as bad and criminal. Lead "thanks to ulema, kyai, habaib, and ustadz… so that the rally proceeds in an orderly way" This sentence constructs a denotation that as if ulema and habib are the source of riot. This sentence makes a line that divides Islam and government. Paragraph 1 and 2 "riot" November 4 peace rally is judged as a riot and not as an attempt to express opinion, even though a riot, in fact, happened not as a formal scenario of November 4 peace rally. Paragraph lead, 1 , 4, 7 "rally" The right to express opinion in the public is the right of every citizen. Basically, this rally has been meant as negative one which tends to impose their own interests rather than demand the right. Protest is often attributed to demonstration against the government and considered illegal. Paragraph 8, 10, 11, "protester" This shows the subject of protest which is perceived as a group of people who are opposed to the government. Paragraph 7 "tension began to erupt" The rally is perceived as a riot.
Paragraph 8 "clashed" The detail of riot is highlighted. November 4 rally is perceived as a riot and vandalism rather than a peaceful rally. Paragraph 9 "two policemen were injured because of hard object throw" Apparatus is perceived as "victim" which means the protagonist is the government, Jokowi. This is Cinderella effect.
Source: Kompas, November 4, 2016, page 1 From Table 1, Kompas linguistic messages portrayed November 4 rally as illegal and against the law. This accusation leads to accusation that this was a political matter not a matter of prosecution of Islam people's legal rights but it was a political treason.
Kompas constructed signs tend to interpret Islam people as the opposition of the government. This identification presented Islam people as marginal and subversive group. This is a stereotype from Islam demonization which is often seen in Western media (Poole, 2002).
The accusation was conducted verbally by giving general positions of Islam people. First, Islam people are regarded as a rioter of riot. Secondly, President is the opposite of Islam people and Islam people is the opposite of the government. It was clearly shown in the title. Thirdly, the legality of the demonstration is questioned.
The rally was considered as an act against the law by presenting evaluation mode; provided violation justification by displaying Constitution quote as legality of symbol ratification and constitution.
Meanwhile, clash of civilization frame on Kompas news was referred in several things: (1) Impose democratization and labelling as anti-democratization by accusing there is a subversive political movement as shown in the title. This is as Western who always promotes democratization as their political supremacy by compelling other people to honour democratization and political existence (Huntington, 1993).
President's speech regarding political actor and peaceful rally was symbolized subversively as rally, riot, or, even, treason. This shows conflict position tendency of Kompas. Kompas wanted a perspective that they were in the right side. This is civilization arrogance which theoretically is the baseline characteristics towards clash of civilization; (2) Joko Widodo governance, including Kompas as media regime, has emphasized their conflict position by identifying their political rivals specifically Islam civilization as archenemy.
The Construction of Linguistic Messages of Republika Daily Newspaper, November 5, 2016, and the semiotic analysis on media linguistic as follow: "Action of Dignity The action of November 4 is interpreted as a legal and constitutional action. This is a democratic action regarded as a commendable social action that is not against the law and as a persecution of rights as well as a struggle of freedom. Paragraph 1 "The Action of Muslims" The action of November 4 is defined as the action of Muslims. An action that needs to be done by the Muslims and this movement is an Islamic action. Paragraph 2 "Action of Peace" The action of November 4 is defined as the action of peace, unconstitutional threat.

Paragraph 4 "A number of figures from various Muslim organizations"
Islamic leader as a public figure; respected as the leaders in the community. Paragraph 5 "President Joko Widodo was also asked not to defend Basuki from the hands of the law" President Jokowi has a special attachment with Ahok (Basuki). He is considered to defend the incumbent governor. In this case, the President is considered as the antagonist who is responsible for the defamation of the Quran. Paragraph 6 "that's why this problem is back to the national leader" The main problem of this polemic is the authority or the government.
Paragraph 6 "couldn't make it to meet and talk with President" President as the opposition of Muslims.
Paragraph 14 "Indonesian Muslims show the dignified practice of democratization" Muslims as a dignified people.
Paragraph 16 "until now, the roots of the fray are still unknown" The riot is not described as a part of the action but something outside the action. Source: Republika, November 5, 2016 From Table 2, Republika verbally interprets the November 4 rally as an act of dignity, and clearly elucidates this action in some constructions. First, this action is described as a struggle of the Muslims. More dignified depiction of this action is seen as a transposition of Indonesian people's struggle prototype in the past. As a concept, Jihad, is often used in Indonesian political and military upheaval during the era before independence.
The existing historical reality in the epic history of Indonesia noted that the upheaval of Indonesian Muslims has always been a major incident, like the battle of November 10, 1945 in Surabaya, Padri War in West Sumatra, Diponegoro War in Central Java, which could potentially interfere the existence of the Dutch imperialist rulers in the past. This construction definitely occurred not without a reason. Republika as an Islamic media uses its nostalgic approach to construct the semiotic association that November 4 is a moment of struggle, not a moment of a rally.
Second, the Muslims and their Muslim figures are constructed as a fighter. This construction is in line with the general depiction of the action of November 4 by Republika by describing that the demonstrators and their leaders are heroic people who fight to uphold the rights of the oppressed. Such action is not something criminal but something that is within reasonable limits. It positions the Muslims as protagonists, while the government, in this case, referring to the relationship of Jokowi-Ahok in several indications above, is described as a collaborator and the coalition.
The third one is the response of President Joko Widodo who did not meet the demonstrators, and the bad comportments of Ahok are interpreted as a betrayal of the rights of the majority. The rally of November 4 is also described as an act against the bad governance which is seen as identical to the action throughout the mid of 1965 and 1966, when the Muslims were head to head against the communists and the government of President Sukarno. Transposition occurs due to a similar pattern of construction and players, as well as the forms of structured dialectic. It indicates that the government of Joko Widodo described in some reports is a representation of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) pro-Soekarno that goes against Muslims who historically were opposed to Soekarnoism.
The linguistic message constructed by Republika contains a framework of the clash of civilization in several respects: first, the increase of the confidence of Muslims. This can be seen from the symbols that direct Muslims as the correct figure demanding on the wrong figure. According to Huntington, the clash with Muslims or the Islam civilization is indicated by the affirmation on the Muslims regarding the truth of their culture, and the obsession that comes from inferiority of Islamic culture power (Huntington, 1993). Form the positive point of view, this is an attempt for a mystification of Islamic culture itself, in which people are led to reorient themselves to the basic values of Islam, or in other words, to restore their identity in their true context.
Second, the new meaning of the word "peace". The word "peace" does not mean there is no care and no retaliation like repertoire of westernstyle democracy. Peace and tolerance are the concept placed on how the rights are met, how the basic values of civilization are put on personal mentality placed in the culture of the civilization. This is an attempt to fight or deconstruct the Western adage, moreover, it is an expression or the most delicate construction of the anti-Western. According to Huntington, the spirit, brought by redefining and deconstructing of these values, is that the nonwestern people want to free themselves from the domination of the economy, military and culture of the West (Huntington, 1993).

c. Visual Construction of Kompas and Republika
The encoded iconic messages are a kind of visual photography accompanying the news of November 4 in Kompas and Republika. The photos actually have not been much different, they describe the reality from an extreme high angled capture of the mass of protesters who crowded around Patung Kuda (Horse Statue) in Jalan Thamrin, Jalan Merdeka Barat and Jalan Merdeka Selatan which is the "kilometer zero" and the central point of the administration of Joko Widodo and Basuki Tjahaja Purnama as Jakarta governor.
The photo shoot location is just a few hundred meters from the Presidential Palace of Joko Widodo, and the City Hall, where Basuki alias Ahok, runs the daily activities as a governor. High angle image is generally used by the photographer to see a large area or to show the greatness of a material. Here, the photos depict crowds of an action with a large number of mass, so as to be interpreted: first, as a festival or a communal community-bond of the lower-middle class society. In the structure of a society, the lower class people commonly get the facility with the affix "common" or "public" that means to illustrate the common people.
Second, people power symbolizes the majority or dominant mass movement. Many people support or do activities in a scene. In this case, the tendency is described as people power or common people. However, journalistic photo does not play an important role before being analyzed by observing the linguistic system that supports the visual. An image presenting demonstration frequently accompanies an event leading to a clash and violence. Within the common sense of great violence or major riot, the image in this news specifically only contains information on how great the mass is, and/or yet leading to the construction of any myth.

d. Myth of Great Riot Versus Myth of Great Struggle
The connotations constructed between linguistic message and coded iconic message lead to two opposing myths. For Kompas, its visual and linguistics bring the myth of "great riot". This myth is built on how the linguistic message indicates that this action is a kind of riot made by the Muslims. That the riot, as mythically identified as the Islamic community, is a major riot led to a political action, led to mass and discomforting riot. The riot was described as performed by people who move unconstitutionally.
Unlike Kompas, Republika whose news indicators leading to the construction of the connotation of the myth of "great struggle". The action of November 4 is portrayed as a struggle for rights; a struggle against the arrogance of the regime, a struggle to defend the values of Islam. The heroism is the soul of this movement, and November 4 was a heroic moment, a moment to demand the law enforcement. Muslims are already running on their track, while the government is interpreted as an antagonist positioned as a regime that does not care, and is portrayed as anti-Islam.
Meanwhile, the myth is the symbols of the invisible feud, a hidden meaning which is closely related to transposition of certain markers of civilization, as the action of November 4 grows with vicious resistance. Both media act as if they are opposite parties with two different myths. A clash of civilization is semiotically found in the form of media connotation combat. This can be seen from the two civilizations at the rear. Kompas with its characteristics associated with Christian historical background and Republika with Islam historical background, are demonstrated connotatively that a serious conflict touching the roots of civilization has existed in two news of November 4 incident.

e. Media Ownership: The Field of Clash of Civilization
Media as a language institution is a cultural capital that basically uses linguistic symbols in its everyday activities. Media has what Bordieau called as symbolic power. Bordieau's symbolic power is conceived as a confidence on the legitimacy of words and on the parties who use them (Swartz, 1997). Symbolic power turns into a seconded capital, so that basically, the media ownership is a fight to get that power. This force is potentially owned by the media owners, therefore, they are not different from a group of people who fight for the control of cultural capital and symbolic capital. This principle is not really considered by Huntingthon related to the analysis of the clash of civilization since the world has been modeled in the current media reality. The symbolic and imagery fight basically can be assumed as a clash of civilization. If this matter meets the assumptions, then it becomes a part of a conflict of civilization, with a particular social group related to civilization and its diasporics that controls the media, and fights for the symbolic legitimacy control.
Kompas and Republika are known as two media with different historical establishment background. As a mainstream media, Kompas was established by Chinese and Catholic groups. PK Ojong, one of the founders of Kompas, is a Chinese descent, and the other founder, Jakoeb Oetama is a Javanese but a devout Catholic.
On the other hand, Republika was founded at the initiative of several Muslim leaders from the New Order who joined the New Order Indonesian Muslim Intellectuals Association (ICMI). On the early days of establishment, the positioning of this newspaper is the media or Muslim newspapers. Although its management has changed several times, the news agenda of Republica in general is to defend Islam.
The ownership and journalists are almost one hundred percent Muslim. Viewed from the fact of ownership, it is clear that seeds and the framework of the clash of civilization have been formed. These are based on several things; first, the ownership correlated with the content, so as the content of the media regarding its manifestation on November 4 news clearly has different symbols; second, the tendency of capital fight among civilizations, among media with similar Islamic background and similar Christian background; third, the accumulation of news sources poles; resources and journalists also have a background that follows the historical form of media.
Kompas comes with resources that support Western and Christian, while Republika mostly emphasizes the sources of anti-Western Islam. Clash of civilization viewed from the perspective of Bordieau's field theory on the ownership war related to "November 4 Incident" can be explained as follows: (1) 4 November Incident is a fight among media ownership. The ownership is based on the media civilization characteristics in which Islam as the main and dominant civilization is represented by Republika. Meanwhile, the Western and Sinic civilizations is represented by Kompas, therefore, the news about November 4 on both media published on November 5, 2016, is basically a symbolic feud based on the clash of civilization; (2) Dramatization of this case that began by symbolizing Basuki (Ahok) on the media with Western civilization has stepped up the pressure against Islam; (3) The return of consciousness of Muslims through the symbols of the media is responded as a resistance which becomes a part of the resistance of the Islamic civilization against Western civilization as a whole.

f. The Action of November 4 and Global Conflict
In recent years, the world is marked by global conflicts, culminating in a clash of civilizations. Theoretically, the clash of civilizations will grow out of relationships of certain conflicts with similar civilizations of the conflicting parties. South China Sea, for example, is a popular one in the discourse of South-East Asia and Asia Pacific region. The aggressive movement of Sinic civilizations such as China and Korea directly clash with the interests of Western civilization along with its allies.
Meanwhile, the Islamic civilization is represented by Muslims in Indonesia, as the country often noted for its largest Muslim population in the world. On the political map of Southeast Asia, Indonesia plays a significant role in terms of its geopolitical interests in the South China Sea. The November 4, 2016 rally is an Indonesian national event occurring amid a heated area politics and clash of civilizations. Some conflicts are intertextually significant if discussed in terms of constructing meaning out of 4 November action: South China Sea conflict. This international geopolitic is a manifestation of civilization contestation in South China Sea, closely linked with the parties at the poles of the clash of civilizations, including China and cronies, Islam and Western civilization. While the 4th of November alone, judging from political interests, tends to stem between Islamist groups and those affiliated to the West and to China.
Issues circulating in Indonesia prior to November 4 are closely related to China-Indonesia relations and social issues related to China's economic domination and Indonesia's foreign policies that are considered too sided with the interests of China and its diaspora in Indonesia. Small racial conflicts such as the burning of temple in Tanjung Balai have raised contestation between groups of Muslim and non-Muslim ethnic groups, particularly the Chinese race affiliated to Christianity and Buddhism.
The situation is getting worse by the South China Sea conflict that accentuates in the aggression of Chinese coastal-guard ships against Indonesian ships. In fact, the Chinese coastal guard ships arrogantly escort Chinese fishing boats doing illegal fishing in the waters of the Exclusive Economic Zone of Indonesia in the Natuna Sea, which they claimed to belong to China in the map of "nine-dash line" in the South China Sea.
On the other hand, the failure of the military coup in Turkey has given confidence for Muslims to return to their cultural values, including the audacity of Islamic groups to criticize the secular western capitalist system disseminated and promoted to dominate the values of social life. The centering on social forces, community organizations, and Islamic media significantly comes to the fore, vocally criticizing or rejecting the secular western capitalist system.

Conclusion
This paper has presented clash of civilization in the news reality construction of the anti-Ahok rally in Kompas and Republika newspapers. When it comes to November 4 rally and its framing in Kompas and Republika, the study concludes: First, the constructions of media have semiotically directed themselves towards the two major myths, i.e. the myth of the great struggle and great riot. Kompas, as a medium with a background of Christian and Chinese civilization, affiliated with the Chinese diaspora and Western civilization, builds the myth of great riot as its meaning construction, while Republika affiliated to Islamic civilization constructed the November 4 action as a great struggle; Second, semiotically, these signs are signifiers within the framework of the clash of civilizations. In this study, the symbols textually formed are transpositions from the clash of civilization, in this case the Islamic civilization and Western civilization having alliance with Sinic civilization. This corresponds to the preposition of the clash of civilization, explaining that the conflict will be followed by a clash of civilizations affiliated and rooted in three great civilizations of the world; Third, media ownership, associated with the ideology behind it, is the prolonged existence of the great civilizations of the world. Kompas as media owned by people who are historically close to the West and China, clashed with Republika affiliated with Islamic ownership and Muslim personnel therein; Fourth, November 4 rally is an event amid analogies and associated with major recent conflicts of the world such as the South China Sea and the Middle East conflicts. Judging from the pattern of conflicts, and the civilization involved, there is a strong analogy so that the symbolic patterns played are identical to global conflicts.
From the four aforementioned points, it can be concluded that the media have become a symbolic battle field for civilizations; the clash of which is manifested through the movement of a symbolic clash semiotically conducted by Kompas and Republika. Therefore, it can be concluded that the news on the November 4, 2016 action in the two newspapers are a battle field for meaning as well as fields for the clash of civilizations.