POLITENESS STRATEGIES OF KARNI ILYAS ABOUT RUU HIP IN INDONESIA LAWYER CLUB ON TV ONE: BENARKAH MELUMPUHKAN PANCASILA?

This research aims to expose how Karni Ilyas, the host of ILC, used politeness strategy through faces in communicating with political experts in ILC show episode RUU HIP: Benarkah Melumpuhkan Pancasila?. This research uses Brown’s and Levinson’s theory of Politeness Strategies. This research is qualitative research; the approach is thematic analysis, the data are fragmentations of Karni Ilyas’ utterances, and the data collection technique is documentation while the technique of data analysis is interpretation. This research exposes a result that Karni Ilyas used politeness strategies in hosting or moderating the show, but he used negative face to speak with speakers he has no intimate bond (in this case, they are Achmad Basarah, Aboebakar Al Habsyi, and Ali Mochtar Ngabalin) and he used positive face to speak with speaker he has familiar connection (in this case, it was Fadli Zon). Karni Ilyas used politeness strategies as a host or moderator in handling the political discussion in the ILC Show of the episode. Subject Area is Pragmatic-Politeness


Introduction
Generally speaking, political discussions are tough because it contains interests, powers, legitimations, competition, party, policies, and other inevitable battles. Surprisingly, although people tend to experience stress when discussing politics and arguing about it, but they still likely crave a burst of adrenaline that triggers nerves and sensation. These sensations can range from selfarrogance, passion, the desire to express opinions, anger, and the opportunity to express something politically. The sort of feeling, fighting against something unjust and immoral, can build a sense of truth and provide a sense of security. It mostly happens in politic discussion that must end in debate. Moreover, the extension and transformation of political participation now is so fluid. It is because widespread deliberation supported by information and communication technologies (Rose & Saebø, 2008). Therefore, in this situation, it cannot be naively taken aside the importance of the role of a moderator. One of good moderators in this kind of discussion in Karni Ilyas and one of TV shows he handles providing political debates is ILC (Indonesian Lawyer Club).
Sukarni "Karni" Ilyas is a prominent journalist and Indonesian law activist. He can be categorized as a successful journalist and have produced many excellent coverage and programs. Karni's academic trajectory started from Faculty of Law, University of Indonesia. Karni began his career as a journalist for the Suara Karya newspaper in 1972. Then, he moved to Tempo Magazine in 1978 to become the managing editor. His expertise in the field of law made Karni get assigned to lead the Forum Magazine from 1991-1999. The following year, Karni held the position of Commissioner of the Forum Magazine. He led SCTV's Liputan 6 from 1999-2005. In just six years, he succeeded in making Liputan 6 SCTV the leading news program in the country. Then, he moved to ANTV in 2005. In 2007, he was entrusted to fix TV One that the Bakrie family had just taken over.. On this television station, his name is quite popular, especially after hosting the program ILC (Indonesia Lawyers Club). On TV One, Karni serves as Director of News or Chief Editor of News and Sports. In 2012, he won the Panasonic Gobel Awards, for the category Life Time Achievement. ILC (Indonesia Lawyers Club) itself is a talk-show program broadcast on TV One. This event featured a 210-minute dialogue on political, legal and criminal matters guided by Karni Ilyas. This program is broadcast every Tuesday at 8 pm. and Sunday at 7:30 pm.
Karni's background seems to explain completely the relevance of his hosting and moderating skills and his communication skills. As an ex-reporter, he touched the reality from any socio-economy classes. As an ex-editor on TV, he knew how media work and blow-up information.
As an ex-activist, he knew how to aspire and listen to someone else's perspectives. He is a perfect example of how good language skills function in handling political debate: in this case, it is Karni's politeness strategies in hosting or moderating political discussion.
Politeness strategy is a topic discussed in pragmatics. Pragmatics itself is a branch of linguistics and semiotics envisaging how context contributes to meaning through speech act theory, conversational implicature, interactive talk, and other linguistics approaches (Clancy & O'Keeffe, 2015). Therefore, politeness strategy cannot be separated from meaning and context (Shappeck, 2004). Having perspective in pragmatics refers to understanding of communicative action and how to convey it, and skill of using language properly in context. ILC is seemingly space of sociolinguistic situation and discourse universe in which the interlocutors (who are majorly experts) deliver various functions of language to make communication system get distributed.

Literature Review
Theory of politeness in pragmatics was developed by Brown & Levinson (1987). In a communication, they saw that each interlocutor exposes what so-called face. Face shows how people interact in their daily life. In interaction, nobody has freedom completely in uttering things. Some are anxious and the other are expressive. people act socially; they strive to preserve the identity for others expecting to see. This constructive identity is an image or figure we expect to showoff publicly as a self-image. It means, throughout social interaction, we project ourselves socially. Losing face means losing self-image. This Brown-Levinson analysis of politeness can be reinterpreted and applied to political texts and communication (Chilton, 1990).
Saving face can be granted by keeping a line during interaction socially. A line here is the synchronization between the speakers' utterances and hearers' understanding. Therefore, simply to say, social interaction is actually a process of combining line and face. Brown and Levinson (1987) conceptualized face to explicate the presence of politeness in an interaction or communication. For them, politeness is universal, and it has consequence of resulting someone's face: positive and negative face. Positive face refers to someone's desire to be loved or liked, approved, appreciated, and so on. Negative face refers to someone's desire not to be obligated, imposed, disrupted, intruded, and so on (Longcope, 1995).
Faces are manifested in speech act. Speech act is any language and non-language components which include the complete language action, which involves the participants in the conversation, the form of delivery of the message, the topic, and the context of the message. Speech act can be pigeonholed as polite if the speech has no force, provides choices or options to the speaker to do thing, and gives relief and familiarity to the hearer. By being polite ion communication, it can make abstract construal, temporal distance, and spatial distance (Stephan et al., 2010). However, language and its meaning are contextual. Each language drives different context. Context is tightly leashed to culture. Therefore, politeness is expressed differently because different culture determines it. In other words, politeness is about intimacy, familiarity, and understanding between the speaker and the hearer (Brown & Levinson, 1988).
By communicating contextually, expressing language requires politeness strategies. Politeness strategies are divided into two: positive and negative politeness strategy. Positive politeness strategies are used to express intimacy, familiarity, and understanding between the speaker and the hearer. In contrast, negative politeness strategies are used to express distant, low solidarity, or unfamiliarity between the speaker and the hearer. Simply to say, politeness strategy defines a strategy to avoid conflict which can be measured by the degree of effort made to avoid conflict situations. In making it properly, interaction or communication requires what so-called, maxim. Maxim is a linguistic rule in lingual interaction the rules that govern his actions, use of language, and interpretations of the interlocutor's actions and speech. Politeness maxims fundamentally comprise the strategy of keeping the face in the interaction by exploiting the positiveness to others instead of exposing the self-positiveness. Therefore, it can be simply said that it about cost-benefit, dispraise-praise, disagreement-agreement, and sympathy-antipathy (Leech, 2014).
Someone's performance must conform to social contract which consists of social expectations, respects, diffidence, humility, and so on. Politeness is the root for preserving and refining communication. Politeness is juxtaposed on social status, power, kinship structures, and formal-informal situation (Ide, 1989). Politeness theory is referred to cultural norms and narrative. It also reflects desire concept (face wants) which is tightly knotted to a precise culture. Thus, politeness is inclined by P (power), D (distance), and R (relationship) affected by speech events (Blum-Kulka, 2012). In this sense, politeness is the use of the proper words in the proper context and it is determined by social rules (Arndt & Janney, 1985). Society determines politeness, politeness is in line with an affiliation between behavior and suitability convention, not by specific linguistic forms.
It can be simply concluded that politeness is a use of proper words contextually and it cannot be leashed from social rules. Socially, interaction maintain politeness in smooth interaction and evade the use of speech acts with face-threatening act. The principle refers the use of politeness intimacy and reduce the social distance between the interlocutors. People implement a certain value in a pragmatic scale socially and culturally.

Methodology
This research is qualitative study because it is phenomenological-based analysis from cases of how Karni Ilyas moderates/hosts ILC shows. Qualitative research is also usually conducted to explore and understand the meaning in social problem or discourse (Creswell, 2007). The approach of this research thematic analysis. It is a way to analyze data (which are analyzed theoretically in Brown's and Levinson's politeness strategies) with the aim of identifying patterns or to find themes through the data collected by researchers (Aronson, 1995). Thematic analysis is a core skill or basic knowledge to carry out analysis in qualitative research. Thematic analysis is appropriate for extracting information to determine the relationship between variables and to compare different sets of evidence that relate to different situations in same field of study (Alhojailan & Ibrahim, 2012). Language and politics are relevant, thus it used thematic analysis. The data are fragmentations of Karni Ilyas' utterances and the source of the data is Karni Ilyas' utterances in ILC show, episode RUU HIP: Benarkah Melumpuhkan Pancasila?. Some speakers to be mentioned in this discussion are Achmad Basarah, Aboebakar Al Habsyi, Ali Mochtar Ngabalin, and Fadli Zon. The episode can be accessed freely on Youtube ILC TV One. The technique of data collection is documentation. It refers to take fragments of the quotation as proving documents. On the other hand, the technique of data analysis is interpretation because the fragments require interpretation to trace the politeness strategies which are unsaid.

Results and Findings
There are some episodes taken and analyzed in this research. The central focus of the discussion is how Karni Ilyas moderates and utters politeness strategies. As it is known generally, Karni Ilyas is the host of ILC and ILC can be implicitly as a forum that was born from conflict. Of course, conflicts in advocate organizations are not new things. The split in the advocate organization was one of the reasons for the birth of a club called the Indonesia Lawyers Club (ILC).
The first episode to discuss is entitled "RUU HIP: Karni Ilyas: Audience, we meet again at the Indonesia Lawyers Club, in the episode of the Law Draft of The Direction of Pancasila Ideology and ideological complaints. Is Pancasila paralyzed Pancasila? Audience, in the midst of the hectic pace of the Covid-19 or corona virus issue, suddenly we are shocked by the political polemic ... there are differences of opinion between factions, PKS faction, for example, refusing, PAN faction provides notes, and Democrat faction does not attend at all ... But what is the actual clarity of PDIP, we will join the vice chairman of the DPR RI who is also the chairman of the DPI PDI Perjuangan, Ahmad Basara, I invite Mr. Achmad Basarah! In this first greeting, Karni proposed common greeting, from audiences to click bait or the issue to hype up. After that, Karni exposed the problem in the middle of COVID-19 which surprised political experts: an issue of paralyzing Pancasila. In the meeting conference in drafting the law of the direction of Pancasila Ideology some factions seem to oppose. Karni started to ask the spokesman from one of the factions, PDIP. Here Karni said, "vice chairman of the DPR RI who is also the chairman of the DPI PDI Perjuangan, Ahmad Basara." In this situation, Karni used negative face by applying respecting social status, power, kinship structures, and formal situation. He also mixed it with little bit informal respecting social status can be understood from how he exposing Basara's position as the vice chairman of the DPR RI and as the chairman of the DPI PDI Perjuangan. Being a member of DPR in Indonesia is respectable, and of course, being the vice chairman of DPR in Indonesia is more than respectable position. It is Karni's positive politeness strategies to grasp the familiarity but with negative face. He changed the respect calling of "Pak" into the social status and position of the addressee. This strategy can work well because many cultures in Indonesia seems to have a traditional ideology, just call it feudal nuance.
Basically speaking, feudalism is a structure of socio-political power that is traditionally carried out by an aristocracy or a monarchy system to control the various territories which are claimed through cooperation with local leaders as partners. In the original sense, this structure was pinned by historians to the political system in Europe throughout the Middle Ages, which placed the knights and other aristocratic classes (vassals) as rulers of certain regions or rights (in Latin, it is called fief, in plural feudum) designated by monarchy (usually king or lord). The term feudalism itself has been used since the 17 th century. Since the 1960s, some historians have expanded the use of this term to include aspects of the social life of land workers on land controlled by landlords, giving rise to the term feudal society. Therefore, the use of the term feudalism has an increasingly negative connotation (Roach, 2015). In everyday language usage in Indonesia, this term is often used to refer to behaviors that are similar to those of tyrannical rulers, such as conservative, always want to be respected, or stick to old values that have been many were left behind, and so on.
With all due respect, what implies here is how feudalism brings no negative connotation in Karni's term, but how feudalism is used to show some respects to Basara. It also seems to deconstruct the definition because it is not age-based enitity that makes someone respects, but the essence. Karni sees that Basara is younger than him, but he knows well that Basara is the vice chairman of DPR and he must respect it with no doubt. It cannot stupidly operate intimacy without border because they both are on TV and they speak as seniors, experts, and formal people on political debate being watched by all Indonesian. Therefore, how Karni exposed Basara's status is positive politeness strategy. It is a way to make the speaker feels being respected and he do the same in return. After Basara explained things that matter to explain, Karni responded it by stating, Karni Ilyas: There is a little question Mr. Basarah. First, it was emphasized that this was not an idea or suggestion from the PDI ... Pancasila, which can be squeezed into Trisila, then can be squeezed again into Ekasila ... Isn't that the speech of Ibu Mega ...? Then the second ... Isn't Pancasila itself an umbrella for all laws in this republic? Does Pancasila still need an umbrella? Isn't the 1945 Constitution a preamble for all laws that were born in this republic? Maybe that was my question in the past, the vice chairman of the DPR.
Karni did it again. Karni proposed positive politeness strategy with negative face. He mentioned the name of Basarah with "Pak" which is polite in for Indonesian society, called Mega, the chief of PDIP party, with "Ibu" which refers to very formal greeting for woman who is respectable, and the last he called Basarah with "the vice chairman of DPR" which strengthen his positive face. Karni seemed to keep the distance in a formal way and power as someone who is senior in political expertise. Of course, in this consequence, Karno did not lose the relationship. It also reflects Brown's and Levinson's perspective about being polite. For them, being polite is actually about the face of both belonging to the speaker and the speech partner. As it has been exposed theoretically before, face, in this case, is not in the sense of physical form, but face in the sense of public image, or perhaps the correct equivalent of the word is self-pride in the view of society. They also meant that face is not a mere social attribute, but a personal attribute owned by everybody, thus it is universal. A positive face is related to the values of intimacy between the speaker and the speech partner. A positive face is related to the values of solidarity, informality, recognition, and covertness. A negative face is different from a positive face, where speakers and speech partners expect the values of intimacy, informality, and covertness to be maintained. Negative face is where speakers and speech partners expect social distancing. The negative face refers to a person's desire to remain independent, free from outside interference, and the respect of outsiders for their independence (Diani, 2014).
Contextually to Karni in speaking to Basarah, is a senior journalist talking to high-profile politician/government representative. It is no doubt that Karni used politeness strategies but with negative face, to keep the distance and did not reduce his power in front of Basarah. Karni also mentioned Megawati with proper calling, "Ibu" which means polite and respectful. Dyah Permata Megawati Setyawati Soekarnoputri, or generally known as Megawati Soekarnoputri was the fifth President of Indonesia who served from 23 July 2001 to 20 October 2004. She is the first Indonesian woman president and daughter of the first Indonesian president, Soekarno. On September 20, 2004, he lost the vote to Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono in the second round of the 2004 Presidential Election. He became president after MPR held extraordinary conference in response to demote the position of President Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur) who wanted to freeze MPR and DPR and Golkar Party. She was inaugurated as President on July 23, 2001. Previously from 1999-2001, he served as Vice President in the government of President Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur). Megawati has also been chairman of PDIP Party since separating from the PDI in 1999. This position that made Karni mentioned her name with all respects "Ibu" because Basarah is from the faction PDIP. This is a strategy to respect Basarah and his senior colleague. This politeness strategy affects to his position as host or moderator.
Besides moderating the duration and controlling the topic to Basarah, Karni also spoke to Aboebakar Al Habsyi. Karni said, "Malam, baik pemirsa sekarang saya ingin ke Pak Ustadz Aboebakar dulu. Jangan-jangan PKS mengusulkan" (Good Night, audiences, now I want to go to Pak Ustadz Aboebakar firstly. Maybe PKS suggested a thing). It is actually a common greeting to someone and give the one addressed a space to speak up ideas. However, one thing that catches a spotlight is how Karni used the term of "Pak Ustadz". The term of "Pak" in Bahasa has connotated politeness and respect. Karni added it with the term of "Ustadz" which connotated the higher value of respect in Islam religion. In English, "Ustadz" can be referred to a cleric or chaplain, someone who knows religion well, especially Islam if it is taken into Indonesian context.
As it is known visibly, Indonesia is the world's largest Muslim country. Indonesia's population of Muslims in 2010 reached 209.12 million or around 87% of the total population. Then in 2020, Indonesia's Muslim population is estimated to reach 229.62 million. Meanwhile, the country with the second largest Muslim population is India, which is 176.2 million people. The country with the third largest Muslim population in the world is Pakistan, with 167.41 million people. For information, the number of Muslim populations in the world in 2010 reached 1.6 billion people or about 23% of the total population which reached 6.9 billion in 2010 (global religiousfutures.org). This number is not just a mathematical calculation that can be taken aside, it is a large number that can shape a particular religious situation to discuss. There are many Islamic organization spread over the countries, there are many various typical ideologies of Islamic practices in this country and even many chaplains (ulama) bringing their pilgrims and congregations. The point is, Islam in this country seems to be, without any offense, a fanatism and of course, it is a sensitive issue to be hyped up.
With this kind of understanding, Karni called Aboebakar Al Habsyi with an honor call "Ustadz" to polish the intimacy with some kind of distance to get the respect. This is a kind of positive politeness but with negative face. By calling "Ustadz", Karni positioned himself as someone who respected Aboubakar as a spotlight in Muslims' community. On the other hand, it gives a gap or distance that made him have power. Respecting others can impose power because the other can have no reason to strike or insult him. It also implies that Karni shows kindness to Aboubakar. However, when Aboubakar was given the time to speak up, he strived to drive the issue of drafting Law in Pancasila revision as a communism practice. He exposed the history of communism party in Indonesia did the same thing. Here, Karni interrupted by saying, "Iya tapi di Undang-Undang itu rancangan Undang-Undang itu tidak terbesit sama sekali akan menghidupkan kembali partai komunis, kenapa curiganya ke situ?" (Yes, but in the draft, it does not appear at all to revive the communist party, why are you suspicious of that?). This reaction shows that Karni had position as a host to control the issue even if he knew that it was Aboubakar who spoke. It means that, even if Aboubakar is an Ustadz, he respected that. Even if the Ustadz had the time to speak, he still showed his position as a man standing on his stage. The interruption as topic control shows knowledge. He exposed his negative face with positive politeness, because he questioned not debated, although implicitly, he prevented the misunderstanding of communism went further.
The next one is how Karni brought Ali Mochtar Ngabalin to the discussion. Ali Mochtar Ngabalin is an Indonesian teacher and politician. Karni Ilyas: Audiences, we continue our discussion, now I go to the main expert of KSP Ali Mochtar Ngabalin, whose appearance, according to Ustadz Aboubakar has changed completely, usually wearing, now wearing a cap like a new normal. Due to new normal, he changed his body appearance. This is a kind of strategy Karni used in flow up the discussion. He tried to make the discussion revive by roasting and burning Aboubakar's statement toward Ali Mochtar. Karni used politeness strategy with negative face. He mentioned Ali Mochtar's status and position to give him a position but he also trickly burned it with Aboubakar's statement. As a host or moderator, he knew his capability. He knew that he was someone who revived the discussion. He bridged the discussion by restating Aboubakat's statement to make Ali Mochtar react. Of course, it is a sort of strategy without being blamed. It is a sort of sarcastic irony. Sarcastic irony is classically used to criticize intimates (generally, the hearers). However, sarcasm can serve a face-saving function. It can make the speaker look less rude and unfair, especially when expressing a slight criticism; humor sense can contribute to this face-saving (Jorgensen, 1996). Karni did it well, although it looked like, he seemed to pour salt on fresh wound. This politeness strategy works well because Ali Mochtar replied Karni's greeting, "Datok Karni Ilyas yang dimuliakan oleh Allah SWT, para pemirsa yang budiman, Assalamualaikum Warahmatullah Wabarakatuh (Datuk Karni Ilyas who is glorified by Allah SWT, dear audiences, Assalamualaikum Warahmatullah Wabarakatuh.). Ali called Karni Datuk. Datuk is a Malay title commonly used in Brunei and Malaysia, as well as a traditional title by Minangkabau people in Indonesia. Karni is Minangkabau people. Ali knew it and he spoke it as a good greeting to Karni. It showed that how Karni used politeness strategy by saying Ali is the main expert of KSP worked well. Ali respected Karni by saying that Karni is a Datuk. Social and cultural context works here. From language to respects and to cultural context. After that, Ali reacted to Karni's restatement of Aboubakar by attacking Aboubakar cynically. Then, the show went well.