Respons Publik Terhadap Komunikasi Krisis Jatim Park 1 dalam Memulihkan Kepercayaan Publik Pasca Insiden Kecelakaan Wahana Pendulum 360 Derajat (Studi Kasus pada Pengunjung Jatim Park 1)

Safety crises at tourist destinations can seriously impact public trust, especially when incidents go viral on social media and demand rapid and transparent communication responses from organizations. This study aims to describe and analyze public responses to the crisis communication conducted by Jatim Park 1 in restoring public trust following the Pendulum 360 Degree ride accident that occurred on April 8, 2025, as well as to identify the background factors that influenced public meaning-making regarding that communication. This study employed a qualitative approach using a case study method, analyzed through the framework of Image Restoration Theory by William L. Benoit, encompassing the strategies of Mortification, Corrective Action, and Reducing Offensiveness. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with five key informants who were visitors and one supporting informant from the Public Relations team of Jatim Park 1, field observation, and social media documentation. The results indicate that public responses were diverse and gradual: the public responded positively to the official apology, however the 10-day gap before the clarification was released was interpreted by the public as a delay. Responses toward corrective actions varied depending on the timing of the visit and the visitors' direct experiences. Transparency programs based on visual evidence, such as the HSE Team Video, received the highest response compared to declarative programs. Trust recovery took place partially and was conditional in nature, with a pattern of selective avoidance specifically toward the Pendulum ride. This study also found a gap between the organization's understanding of transparency (responsiveness) and public expectations (disclosure). These findings affirm that the effectiveness of crisis communication is not solely determined by what the organization does, but rather by how the public interprets and responds to those actions.