Digital Construction of Surabaya's Modern-Heritage Identity: A Visual Semiotic Analysis of Jalan Tunjungan on Instagram

This study investigates on how meanings are produced and how the myth of Jalan Tunjungan’s urban heritage identity is being constructed through visual storytelling on social media platforms, specifically Instagram. Agaisnt the backdrop of the expanding digital tourism industry, visual narratives extend beyond their representational function. instead, they become instruments of symbolic power that shape place-branding strategies while simultaneously creating conditions for cultural commodification. Positioned within a constructivist paradigm, this descriptive-interpretive qualitative study analyzes 15 digital artifacts and has been selected through purposive sampling based on the principle of data saturation. To dissect these visuals, we employed a multi-layered analytical framework. This approach integrates Kress and van Leeuwen’s Grammar of Visual Design to examine micro-level visual structures. While Barthes’ semiotics acts to interpret broarder cultural meanings. And lastly, Bordieu’s concept of symbolic power to contextualize the ideological processes underlying the identity construction.
The findings demonstrate that visual storytelling on Instagram discursively naturalizes the myth of Surabaya as a "Modern-Heritage City". This myth is sustained through three main ideological pillars: emotional ideology (nostalgia and therapeutic space), commercial ideology (consumption showcase), and social ideology (spectacular spectacle stage). Our analysis reveals that the selection of technical visual elements is not neutral. Instead, it acts as a practice of power by digital actors (government, community, and commercial entities) in negotiating the destination's cultural capital. Ultimately, this study concludes that these meaning production practices successfully create a dynamic hybrid spatial identity. However, they also leave behind a risk of cultural commodification specifically The Instagrammable Gaze where the depth of authentic historical values is potentially reduced to mere aesthetic commodities to satisfy the experience economy.

Urban Heritage, Visual Storytelling, Visual Semiotics

1. Barthes, R. (1977). Rhetoric of the image. Image, Music, Text, 32-51. Fontana Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Budiman, S. (2024). Komodifikasi spasial koridor Tunjungan Romansa: Negosiasi kapital budaya dan gaya hidup Gen-Z di Surabaya [Unpublished master's thesis]. Universitas Airlangga. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Eco, U. (1980). Function and sign: The semiotics of architecture. In G. Broadbent, R. Bunt, & C. Jencks (Eds.), Signs, symbols, and architecture (pp. 11-69). John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Felasari, S., & Purnomo, H. (2022). Exploring collective memory and place attachment using social media data. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1058(1), 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1058/1/012015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Giaccardi, E. (Ed.). (2012). Heritage and social media: Understanding heritage in a participative culture. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Gravari-Barbas, M., & Guinand, S. (2021). The Instagrammable historic city: Marketing heritage, gentrification, and visual consumption. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 27(8), 751-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2020.1846152 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kavaratzis, M. (2004). From city marketing to city branding: Towards a theoretical framework for developing city brands. Place Branding, 1(1), 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.pb.5990005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kim, J. O. (2023). Iconic architecture through the lens of Instagram: Case studies of iconic urban heritage [Doctoral dissertation, University of Exeter]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kotler, P., Bowen, J. T., & Makens, J. (2016). Marketing for hospitality and tourism (7th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Krampen, M. (1979). The semiotics of architectural facades: Reading the urban text. Semiotica, 27(1-3), 205-234. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1979.27.1-3.205 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Larasati, D. A. (2023). Place attachment dan pemaknaan sejarah lokal pada ruang pedestrian Jalan Tunjungan pasca-revitalisasi [Unpublished master's thesis]. Universitas Gadjah Mada. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Lund, N. F., Cohen, S. A., & Scarles, C. (2022). The power of visual storytelling in destination branding on social media. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 23, 100-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100652 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Nasar, J. L. (1990). The evaluative image of the city. Journal of the American Planning Association, 56(1), 41-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369008975742 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Pearson Education Limited. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Pan, B., & Li, X. (2011). The long tail of destination image and online marketing. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 132-152. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Pratama, A. Y., & Wijaya, K. (2023). Kajian nilai arsitektural kawasan berpotensi wisata sejarah dengan pendekatan semiotik: Studi kasus ruko kolonial Surabaya. Sinektika: Jurnal Arsitektur, 20(2), 142-151. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Putra, M. R., & Rahmawati, E. (2025). Strategi destination branding dinas kebudayaan dan pariwisata melalui media sosial Instagram @surabayasparkling. Jurnal Komunikasi Aktual, 7(2), 112-126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Ramadhan, F. (2026). Analisis semiotika komunikasi visual penanda cagar budaya koridor kota lama dan Jalan Tunjungan Surabaya [Unpublished master's thesis]. Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sari, I. P., & Utomo, A. B. (2024). Konservasi kebijakan kualitas visual pada koridor penghubung area historis di Surabaya pusat. The Journal of Indonesia Sustainable Development Planning, 5(2), 201-215. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Smith, A., & Jones, M. (2022). Visualizing the city: Instagram as a platform for urban tourism place-making. Information Technology & Tourism, 24(2), 185-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40558-022-00227-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Stylianou-Lambert, E. (2012). Tourists with cameras: Images of photography. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 1817-1838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2012.06.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Tasci, A. D., & Gartner, W. C. (2007). Destination image and its functional relationships. Journal of Travel Research, 46(4), 413-425. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Teguh, et al. (2021). The Fight for the 2024 Presidential Election Within the PDIP Within the Framework of Tempo (Roland Barthes’ Semiotics Study on the Cover of the May 2021 Edition of Tempo Magazine). Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Tussyadiah, I. P. (2014). Toward a theoretical foundation for digital marketing in tourism. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 31(5), 587-596. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2014.896767 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Urry, J., & Larsen, J. (2011). The tourist gaze 3.0. SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Wang, Q., Zhang, L., & Liu, Y. (2024). Morphological and semiotic analysis of historic urban facades. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 13(1), 88-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2023.09.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Widiastuti, R., & Setiawan, B. (2021). Konstruksi citra visual ruang publik kota berbasis media sosial di Surabaya. Jurnal Tata Kota dan Daerah, 13(1), 25-36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Yang, R., Xie, Y., & Liu, Z. (2026). From place attachment to behavioral intention: Mechanisms in heritage and cultural consumption. Sustainability, 18(4), 1432. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18041432 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Communication Strategies among Promoters During MATTA Fair 2025
• An Examination of Colleen Ballinger’s Experience in Social Media: Cancel Culture Chronicle
• Communication Patterns in Conflict Interactions in Premarital Couples Who Are in Abusive Relationships
• Social Media Use on Mental Health Outcomes among Adolescents and Young Adults in Port Harcourt City
• (Un)Successful Error Repairs in L2 Communication