scholarly journals How Right-Leaning Media Coverage of COVID-19 Facilitated the Spread of Misinformation in the Early Stages of the Pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Motta ◽  
Dominik Stecula ◽  
Christina E. Farhart
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Fox News ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Automated Content Analysis ◽  
Pandemic Response ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Health Experts

In recent weeks, several academic and journalistic outlets have documented widespread misinformation about the origins and potential treatment for COVID-19. This misinformation could have important public health consequences if misinformed people are less likely to heed the advice of public health experts. While some have anecdotally tied the prevalence of misinformation to misleading or inaccurate media coverage of the pandemic in its early stages, few have rigorously tested this claim empirically. In this paper, we report the results of an automated content analysis showing that right-leaning news outlets (e.g., Fox News, Breitbart) were more than 2.5 times more likely than mainstream outlets to discuss COVID-19 misinformation during the early stages of the U.S. pandemic response. In a nationally representative survey (N = 8,914) conducted from 3/10-3/16, we then show that people who consumed more right-leaning news during this timeframe were more than twice as likely to endorse COVID-related misinformation. Alarmingly, survey data further suggest that misinformation endorsement has negative public health consequences, as misinformed people are more likely to believe that the CDC is exaggerating COVID-related health risks.

scholarly journals How Right-Leaning Media Coverage of COVID-19 Facilitated the Spread of Misinformation in the Early Stages of the Pandemic in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Motta ◽  
Dominik Stecula ◽  
Christina Farhart
Keyword(s):  
Media Coverage ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Global Impact ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Pandemic Response ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
The U.S

We have yet to know the ultimate global impact of the novel coronavirus pandemic. However, we do know that delays, denials and misinformation about COVID-19 have exacerbated its spread and slowed pandemic response, particularly in the U.S. (e.g., Abutaleb et al., 2020).

Rethinking the Principle of Justice for Marginalized Populations During COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 611-621
Author(s):  
Henry Ashworth ◽  
Derek Soled ◽  
Michelle Morse
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Limited Resources ◽  
Marginalized Populations ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
The Face ◽  
Pandemic Response ◽  
Guiding Principles ◽  
Health Experts

AbstractIn the face of limited resources during the COVID-19 pandemic response, public health experts and ethicists have sought to apply guiding principles in determining how those resources, including vaccines, should be allocated.

scholarly journals Public Health Guidance and Research Strategies to Combat the Next COVID Pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Reed Cooper ◽  
Mark Crowder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Small Businesses ◽  
Economic Security ◽  
Prevention Measures ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
Political Commentary ◽  
Novel Virus ◽  
Prevention Methods ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Health Experts

COVID-19 has severely disrupted the lives of many with respect to health, economic security, and social behaviors. By analyzing the U.S. response to COVID-19, strategies for dealing with the next pandemic can be established. Analyses on the politicization of science reveal the ineffectiveness of political commentary in overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic, as seen through heterogenous behavioral patterns throughout the U.S. in regard to pandemic prevention measures, such as social distancing. Economic data reveal the importance of financially prioritizing small businesses over large ones and how to ensure individuals are motivated to return to work. The mask mandate was not widely respected throughout the U.S. and was a primary reason for the pandemic's prolonged effects. Due to a lack of trust in the leading health experts, non-pharmaceutical prevention methods were not as effective as they could have been. By analyzing vaccine data, it is clear that pharmaceuticals can and should be developed prior to the next pandemic. Based on the principle of cross-immunity, vaccines that incorporate genomic similarities between virus groups can be researched and administered, which will theoretically reduce the immune system’s reaction to the next novel virus. Overall, the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic had effective and ineffective components. By studying public health procedures and results from this pandemic, recommendations can be made to improve the response to the next pandemic. 

scholarly journals Do COVID-19 Conspiracy Theory Beliefs Form a Monological Belief System?

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne M. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Belief System ◽  
Conspiracy Theory ◽  
School Life ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Home Work ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Health Experts

Along with criticisms of the U.S. government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the disruptions to home, work, and school life resulting from social distancing orders recommended by public health experts, as well as the uncertainty about how long the disruptions will be necessary and when (if ever) we will have a vaccine, have come COVID-19 conspiracy theories (CTs).

scholarly journals Media trust and infection mitigating behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. e003323
Author(s):  
Erfei Zhao ◽  
Qiao Wu ◽  
Eileen M Crimmins ◽  
Jennifer A Ailshire
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Crisis ◽  
Behavioural Responses ◽  
Fox News ◽  
Public Health Crisis ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Risky Behaviours ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Health Messaging

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented public health crisis. It is becoming increasingly clear that people’s behavioural responses in the USA during this fast-changing pandemic are associated with their preferred media sources. The polarisation of US media has been reflected in politically motivated messaging around the coronavirus by some media outlets, such as Fox News. This resulted in different messaging around the risks of infection and behavioural changes necessary to mitigate that risk. This study determined if COVID-related behaviours differed according to trust in left-leaning or right-leaning media and how differences changed over the first several months of the pandemic.MethodsUsing the nationally representative Understanding America Study COVID-19 panel, we examine preventive and risky behaviours related to infection from COVID-19 over the period from 10 March to 9 June for people with trust in different media sources: one left-leaning, CNN and another right-leaning, Fox News. People’s media preferences are categorised into three groups: (1) those who trust CNN more than Fox News; (2) those who have equal or no preferences and (3) those who trust Fox News more than CNN.ResultsResults showed that compared with those who trust CNN more than Fox news, people who trust Fox News more than CNN engaged in fewer preventive behaviours and more risky behaviours related to COVID-19. Out of five preventive and five risky behaviours examined, people who trust Fox News more than CNN practised an average of 3.41 preventive behaviours and 1.25 risky behaviours, while those who trust CNN more than Fox News engaged in an average of 3.85 preventive and 0.94 risky behaviours, from late March to June. The difference between these two groups widened in the month of May (p≤0.01), even after controlling for access to professional information and overall diversity of information sources.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that behavioural responses were divided along media bias lines. In such a highly partisan environment, false information can be easily disseminated, and health messaging, which is one of the few effective ways to slowdown the spread of the virus in the absence of a vaccine, is being damaged by politically biased and economically focused narratives. During a public health crisis, media should reduce their partisan stance on health information, and the health messaging from neutral and professional sources based on scientific findings should be better promoted.

scholarly journals Partisan polarization and resistance to elite messages: Results from survey experiments on social distancing

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Syon P. Bhanot ◽  
Daniel J. Hopkins
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Online Surveys ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Partisan Polarization ◽  
Survey Experiments ◽  
Party Decline ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Health Experts

COVID-19 compelled government officials in the U.S. and elsewhere to institute social distancing policies, shuttering much of the economy. At a time of low trust and high polarization, Americans may only support such disruptive policies when recommended by same-party politicians. A related concern is that some may resist advice from “elite” sources such as government officials or public health experts. We test these possibilities using novel data from two online surveys with embedded experiments conducted with approximately 2,000 Pennsylvania residents each, in spring 2020 (Study 1 in April and Study 2 in May-June). We uncover partisan differences in views on several coronavirus-related policies, which grew larger between surveys. Yet overall, Study 1 respondents report strong support for social distancing policies and high trust in medical experts. Moreover, an experiment in Study 1 finds no evidence of reduced support for social distancing policies when advocated by elites, broadly defined. A second experiment in Study 2 finds no backlash for a policy described as being backed by public health experts, but a cross-party decline in support for the same policy when backed by government officials. This suggests that, in polarized times, public health experts might be better advocates for collectively beneficial public policies during public health crises than government officials.

Trend of Parental Refusal or Delay of Childhood Vaccinations

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Meagan Marie Daoust
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Educational Context ◽  
Health Consequences ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Parental Refusal

The healthcare trend of parental refusal or delay of childhood vaccinations will be investigated through a complex Cynefin Framework component in an economic and educational context, allowing patterns to emerge that suggest recommendations of change for the RN role and healthcare system. As a major contributing factor adding complexity to this trend, social media is heavily used for health related knowledge, making it is difficult to determine which information is most trustworthy. Missed opportunities for immunization can result, leading to economic and health consequences for the healthcare system and population. Through analysis of the powerful impact social media has on this evolving trend and public health, an upstream recommendation for RNs to respond with is to utilize reliable social media to the parents’ advantage within practice. The healthcare system should focus on incorporating vaccine-related education into existing programs and classes offered to parents, and implementing new vaccine classes for the public.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document