Framing the Covid‐19 pandemic: A comparative analysis of Swedish and Danish crisis communication

Abstract

AbstractWe explore how Swedish and Danish leaders used framing in crisis communication to mobilize support for their Covid‐19 mitigation policies. This research note is grounded in social constructionism and framing theory, analysing how framing in crisis communication is used as a political tool to justify a chosen pandemic strategy. We employ content analysis to compare Swedish and Danish press conferences during the early stages of the Covid‐19 pandemic. Denmark and Sweden are politically and culturally similar countries; however, in March 2020, they chose radically different strategies to respond to the escalating Covid‐19 pandemic. Denmark was one of the first countries in Europe to initiate a lockdown, whereas Sweden kept much of society open. Our findings indicate that Swedish and Danish leaders strategically used framing in their communication to convey understanding of the pandemic that supported their respective agendas. Furthermore, the study contributes insight on how framing is used to justify or question the basis of decision‐making in crises. We argue that through constructing a sense of urgency and emphasizing the uncertain nature of the crisis, scientific evidence as the appropriate basis of decision‐making is challenged, prompting a discussion about the political nature and responsibilities in crisis management.