Performing trust: Social media, reputational labor, and economic legitimacy in Indonesia's informal errand economy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61126/dtcs.v4i1.158Keywords:
digital gray space, informal digital economy, errand service providers, trust infrastructure, social capitalAbstract
This study examines how informal errand service providers (jasa suruh) in Indonesia construct and sustain economic legitimacy on social media in the absence of institutional support and formal regulation. It conceptualizes this condition as a digital gray space, where legitimacy is generated through collective social verification rather than institutional recognition. Drawing on Roy’s gray space concept (2005), Pierre Bourdieu’s social capital theory (1986), and Aihwa Ong’s porous sovereignty framework (2006), this study observed seven jasa suruh accounts across Instagram, WhatsApp, and personal websites, and conducted in-depth interviews with 20 participants, comprising nine providers and eleven users in urban Java. Three main findings emerged. First, digital visibility simultaneously facilitates trust formation and market access while increasing reputational risk. Second, social capital functions both as an entry mechanism into the informal economy and as a disciplinary force that intensifies the reputational vulnerability of workers lacking institutional protection. Third, the absence of formal governance shifts transactional and reputational risks onto individual workers and users, thereby reproducing structural precarity. This study contributes to digital communication sociology, informal labor studies, and urban informality by demonstrating that social media functions as a performative infrastructure of legitimacy that is communicatively constructed, institutionally unprotected, and inherently fragile.
References
Badan Pusat Statistik. (2024). Keadaan ketenagakerjaan Indonesia Agustus 2024. Badan Pusat Statistik.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
Chen, M. A. (2012). The informal economy: Definitions, theories and policies (WIEGO Working Paper No. 1). Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Supplement), S95–S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
Coté, M., & Pybus, J. (2007). Learning to immaterial labour 2.0: MySpace and social networks. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization, 7(1), 88–106.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363
Franzke, A. S., Bechmann, A., Zimmer, M., Ess, C., & Association of Internet Researchers. (2020). Internet research: Ethical guidelines 3.0. Association of Internet Researchers.
Gandini, A. (2021). Reputation as capital: The moral economy of digital self-presentation in the gig economy. The Sociological Review, 69(4), 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026121994536
Grabher, G., & König, J. (2020). Disruption, embedded: A Polanyian framing of the platform economy. Sociologica, 14(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/10443
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/228311
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Hart, K. (1973). Informal income opportunities and urban employment in Ghana. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 11(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X00008089
Hine, C. (2015). Ethnography for the internet: Embedded, embodied and everyday. Bloomsbury Academic.
Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Wiley.
Meagher, K. (2010). Identity economics: Social networks and the informal economy in Nigeria. James Currey.
Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.
Octavia, D. (2022). Platform economy and gig work in Indonesia: Worker experiences and regulatory challenges. Journal of Southeast Asian Economies, 39(1), 43–61.
Ong, A. (2006). Neoliberalism as exception: Mutations in citizenship and sovereignty. Duke University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
Rani, U., & Furrer, M. (2021). Digital labour platforms and new forms of flexible work in developing countries: Algorithmic management of work and workers. Competition & Change, 25(2), 212–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024529420905187
Roy, A. (2005). Urban informality: Toward an epistemology of planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976689
Srnicek, N. (2017). Platform capitalism. Polity Press.
Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. Bloomsbury Academic.
Sztompka, P. (1999). Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge University Press.
Tadelis, S. (2016). Reputation and feedback systems in online platform markets. Annual Review of Economics, 8, 321–340. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080315-015325
Thieme, T. A. (2018). The hustle economy: Informality, uncertainty and the geographies of getting by. Progress in Human Geography, 42(4), 529–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517690039
Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112457914
van Doorn, N. (2017). Platform labor: On the gendered and racialized exploitation of low-income service work in the “on-demand” economy. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6), 898–914. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1294194
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Webb, J. W., Tihanyi, L., Ireland, R. D., & Sirmon, D. G. (2009). You say illegal, I say legitimate: Entrepreneurship in the informal economy. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 492–510. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40632826
We Are Social, & Meltwater. (2024). Digital 2024: Indonesia. We Are Social. https://wearesocial.com/id/blog/2024/01/digital-2024/
Williams, C. C., & Lansky, M. A. (2013). Informal employment in developed and developing economies: Perspectives and policy responses. International Labour Review, 152(3–4), 355–380. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2013.00185.x
Wood, A. J., Graham, M., Lehdonvirta, V., & Hjorth, I. (2019). Good gig, bad gig: Autonomy and algorithmic control in the global gig economy. Work, Employment and Society, 33(1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018785616
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lia Hilyatul Masrifah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
