Abstract
How research findings are presented through domestic news can influence behaviour and risk perceptions, particularly during emergencies such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Monitoring media communications to track misinformation and find information gaps is an important component of emergency risk communication. Therefore, this study investigated the traditional media coverage of nine selected COVID-19 evidence-based research reports and associated press releases (PRs) published during the initial phases of the pandemic (April to July 2020) by one national agency. NVivo was used for summative content analysis. 'Key messages' from each research report were proposed and 488 broadcast, print, and online media sources were coded at the phrase level. Manifest content was coded and counted to locate patterns in the data (what and how many) while latent content was analysed to further investigate these patterns (why and how). This included the coding of the presence of political and public health actors in coverage. Coverage largely did not misrepresent the results of the reports, however, selective reporting and the variability in the use of quotes from governmental and public health stakeholders changed and contextualised results in different manners than perhaps originally intended in the PR. Reports received varying levels of media attention. Coverage focused on more 'human-interest' stories (eg, spread of COVID-19 by children and excess mortality) as opposed to more technical reports (eg, focusing on viral load, antibodies, testing, etc). Our findings provide a case-study of European media coverage of evidence reports produced by a national agency. Results highlighted several strengths and weaknesses of current communication efforts.
Highlights
Selective reporting and variability in the use of quotes from governmental and public health stakeholders changed and contextualized results in different ways than perhaps originally intended in press releases (PRs). This emphasises the need for rigour and accuracy in health research related PRs and the need for better engagement with journalists, who are indirect sources of public education, in a pandemic situation
The Prime Minister (Taoiseach) was quoted in 109 sources (22%), the Deputy and CMOs were quoted in 158 sources (32%), and Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) researchers were quoted in 180 sources (37%)
A majority (58%) of quotes from HIQA researchers came from those given in the PRs themselves
Summary
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is a public health emergency causing millions of cases and deaths globally.[1,2,3] This pandemic has been accompanied by what the World Health Organization (WHO) describes as an ‘infodemic,’ or an over-abundance of information that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy scientific information when they need it.[4,5] Reputable information from the WHO and governmental agencies is competing for attention with an unprecedented proliferation of false information and conspiracy theories,[6,7,8] with up to 25%-30% of US and UK samples reporting beliefs in at least one COVID-19 conspiracy theory.[9,10,11] Exposure to COVID-19 misinformation can affect personal health behaviours (eg, wearing face masks, social distancing) and may demotivate individuals from seeking out and thoughtfully processing information on COVID-19.10-15 Media coverage plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and has the potential to influence behaviour and perceptions of risk.[16,17,18,19,20] The media plays an important role in the dissemination of findings from health research as public knowledge about COVID-19 is largely acquired through domestic news (TV, print, and digital) and social media platforms.[16,21,22] In this context, it is important that health research is communicated by researchers, research organisations, and the media clearly and accurately. Monitoring media communications to track misinformation and find information gaps is an important component of emergency risk communication.[23]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International journal of health policy and management
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
