The Resonance of Workers' Voices

Amid the Labour Day commemoration at Monas, a simple question elicited non-uniform responses. Some answered “yes”, others “no”. That brief moment quickly sparked widespread discussion. For those not present and only hearing from recordings, the differences were not always clear. However, the lively chatter in the media rapidly amplified the incident—even potentially shifting attention away from the main message about workers. What matters in this event is not who to blame, but the consequences of interpreting the message in the communication process: the gap between the delivered message and the workers’ own experiences. The lack of consensus in responses is more reasonably seen as a sign that resonance has not yet fully formed. In communication studies, the audience is never singular. The masses are not a uniform group receiving messages identically, but a space of diverse encounters. Differences in answers are not deviations, but consequences of the fundamental nature of public communication. In a public space laden with symbols, these differences are never entirely neutral. They are easily read as disruptions, rather than expressions of diverse experiences. At this point, the answers become “costly”—not because they are forbidden, but because their meanings are quickly narrowed. This way of reading aligns with Stuart Hall’s view on how messages are understood differently by audiences. The same message can be accepted, negotiated, or rejected, depending on individual experiences. In such situations, non-uniform responses are not problems to be eliminated, but realities to be understood. This is where resonance becomes crucial. It means not just a message that is heard, but a connection between the delivered message and workers’ lived experiences, making it feel relevant and triggering reinforcing responses.