Improving the Policy Communication Architecture for MBG

President Prabowo Subianto’s directive to focus the Free Nutritious Meals Programme (MBG) on children suffering from malnutrition is an important step. This is not merely a technical correction, but a signal that policy is moving from grand ambitions towards targeted precision. This shift is crucial as it demonstrates efforts to align political vision with implementation realities. However, behind this adjustment lies another equally critical aspect that must be improved: the policy communication architecture. In a programme as large as MBG, communication cannot be positioned merely as a tool for conveying information. It is the primary instrument in building legitimacy, managing expectations, and sustaining public trust. Without a strong communication architecture, even policies with the best intentions risk losing credibility in the public’s eyes. Conversely, public narratives become dominated by criticism, uncertainty, and suspicion, ranging from issues of mass poisoning, budget usage, governance, to accusations of politicisation. This phenomenon is not just a matter of negative sentiment, but an indication of a gap between the messages the government wishes to convey and the perceptions formed in the public sphere. When the communication space is not filled strategically and consistently, it will be filled by other narratives that may not align with policy goals. The issue with MBG is no longer just about policy design, but about how the policy is framed, communicated, and executed in reality before the public. This is where it is important to view communication not as an additional activity, but as a structured system. A policy communication architecture. This architecture consists of several interconnected components: from how policy is built morally (credibility), to how the system responds to crises (responsiveness), and how public expectations are managed and maintained. Without this framework, communication will run partially, reactively, and easily lose direction when public pressure increases. First, regarding credibility and moral narrative. Every public policy requires a strong moral foundation, especially when targeting fundamental issues like child nutrition fulfilment. However, the moral narrative cannot stand alone; it must be supported by execution capacity and the integrity of the actors behind it. The public does not only hear what the government says, but also assesses whether the message is consistent with on-the-ground realities. When the moral narrative is not balanced with capacity, it quickly turns into scepticism. In many cases, the recurring pattern is that ambitions are announced first, while the system follows. MBG reflects this pattern; its intentions are strong, but promises locked too quickly in the public space create pressure that is difficult to control.