Perencanaan Komunikasi Pemasaran Wonderful Indonesia Sebagai Place Branding Indonesia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tourism is a leading sector that became the foundation of the economy in Indonesia. As a leading sector, tourism plays an important role in increasing foreign exchange and expanding employment. Therefore, the government is focusing the tourism sector through marketing communication activities conducted by Kemenpar, one of them by using Wonderful Indonesia. Wonderful Indonesia is currently considered to have successfully promoted Indonesian tourism abroad. Because of the success, the researcher is interested to research about marketing communication planning conducted by Kemenpar by using qualitative approach and deep interview method. The results of this study indicate that Kemenpar performs all marketing communication planning steps covering three key resources, situation analysis, objectives, strategy, tactics, implementation and control that can support Indonesian place branding by fulfilling ten components in place branding. The findings in this research are Branding Advertising Selling (BAS) strategy which is always used for every marketing communication activity. In this strategy Kemenpar not only branding Wonderful Indonesia, but also tried to sell Indonesia tourism destinations.
 
 Keywords : Wonderful Indonesia, Marketing Communication Planning, Place Branding
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it