Recovery, Renewal, Resilience

Throughout the pandemic, the media has played a critical role in communicating aspects of crisis management, containment and response. A further opportunity may lie in harnessing the current levels of public engagement that have been developed through COVID-19 response to drive a new narrative. Consider the potential for media communications to:

• Support and drive a national recovery and renewal narrative that focuses on the next steps, generates awareness and interest from the public and builds a collective national effort to recover and renew from COVID-19 (as was highly effective for response and the recruitment of volunteers)
• Clearly communicate who is responsible for recovery and renewal priorities, what these priorities are and why, and how citizens should be encouraged to participate in recovery and renewal efforts
• Generate public interest in specific topics/recovery areas to encourage donations/funding for organisations that are working to create societal changes that reduce inequalities
• Local government and voluntary organisations can utilize the media to engage the government and public in societal changes that are crucial, through agenda setting, i.e. influencing public interest and the importance placed on certain topics through the deliberate coverage of certain topics/issues. Agenda setting has been found to influence public agendas, spending/funding generation and policies, with the media prompting policymakers to take action and satisfy the public's interest
• Generate funding by mobilising a local and national community of supporters

The success of the vaccine programme will, in part, depend on how many people accept the vaccine. The prevailing narrative in a country may influence those who are anxious about the vaccine or uncertain about whether they should have it. Often there are vocal groups in support of, and in opposition to, vaccines and those groups are already very active around COVID-19. Governments will be a main facilitator of vaccine programmes so (in collaboration with partners) should consider addressing voices that oppose vaccine programmes. WHO provides guidelines for responding to vaccine deniers, including broad principles for health authority spokespersons on how to behave when confronted. The principles are based on psychological research on persuasion, public health, communication studies, and on WHO risk communication guidelines. The WHO guidelines cover:

• Tactics by vocal vaccine deniers e.g. skew science, shift hypothesis, censor, and attack opposition
• Who is the target for advocating vaccines i.e. the public are your audience, not the vaccine deniers
• The speaker should represent the well-grounded scientific consensus
• Verbal and nonverbal skills, and listening skills
• Do's and don'ts of verbal and nonverbal communication
• Constructing the argument to support vaccination

In Melbourne (Australia), residents of a tower block on hard lockdown put together an information sheet for the predominantly non-English speaking community to explain the government's measures. The information sheet was translated into ten written, and five oral languages within 24 hours. The information sheet was then distributed among residents within the tower via text and WhatsApp and to community networks to help disseminate government messaging to communities more widely. Consider:

• Assessing whether your organisation has information translated sufficiently for the communities it interacts with
• How to effectively disseminate information to marginalised communities, and the networks most adept at doing this
• How to engage with networks that can access marginalised people in their communities, through religious or social networks to assess if needs are being met and if information is being received and understood
• The efficiency of utilising community networks to identify different languages and cultures, and their proficiency in translating key public health messages

Cognitive bias affect how events are remembered and how people behave, so can influence decision-making that can impact recovery. For example, not showing symptoms of COVID-19 may lead people to think that they are immune or won't infect others. Other cognitive bias is related to people's selectivity about what they pay attention to and so what they do in response to public health advice. Cognitive bias may be mitigated by:

• Communicating testimonials and stories to challenge thinking about practices that are safe and unsafe
• Sharing transparent and consistent information across all platforms to reduce misinformation and distrust
• Providing easy to find information through mechanisms such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to reduce ambiguity

Providing information that supports collective action so people feel they are part of solving the problem

This lesson was contributed by a Risk Manager in Australia during project data collection.

For example, the CovidSafe App in Australia:

• Alarmed and confused users with a message saying they had coronavirus, despite not being tested
• Suffered from hoaxes and phishing scams to retrieve people's personal information. For example, a text to users claiming to be from the government purported a new coronavirus contact-tracing app

By circulating through social media, encrypted messaging services, online discussion boards and face to face interaction. To achieve this, organisations might consider:

• Identifying fake news and actively debunking it on own social media accounts and public display boards
• Closely monitor automated systems for errors. In Australia the CovidSafe App alarmed and confused users with a message telling them that they had contracted coronavirus when trying to upload their information, despite not being tested. Additionally, in Ukraine, residents attacked busses with evacuees from China after a hoax email falsely attributed to the Ministry of Health suggested some carried the virus
• Supporting the public to think critically about, question and fact-check information they receive
• Working with community leaders to circulate useful, accurate information
• Monitoring and evaluating the impact of their own communication strategy, possibly working with partners such as universities to undertake social media analytics

In Australia there is a highly organised and well-tested communications system that utilises standard emergency communications procedures used for other disasters such as forest fires. Australian risk managers highlighted two issues which may be useful for others.

In order to deliver efficient and effective communication during an emergency, an understanding of how the public perceives and receives this information; awareness of cognitive bias , which shapes the way people understand the information provided to them, is needed[1]. Cognitive bias impacts decision-making as a result of how events are remembered by individuals and influences behaviours that can impact recovery. For example, not showing symptoms of COVID-19 and therefore believing you are immune or won’t infect others. Other cognitive bias is related to people’s selectivity about what they pay attention to which has implications for retaining and enacting public health advice. This may be mitigated by:

• Communicating testimonials and stories to challenge peoples thinking about practices that are safe and unsafe
• Sharing transparent and consistent information across all platforms to reduce misinformation and distrust
• Providing easy to find information through mechanisms such as Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) to reduce ambiguity
• Providing information that supports collective action towards a solution so people feel they are part of solving the problem and understand that change is required

To addresses some of these biases, health messaging experts in Australia called for:

• Effective use of television streaming services, social media and news services, rather than use of posters that had unclear messages and images
• More effective communications from politicians that answer questions in snappy sentences rather than long answers where people become confused or lose interest, and consistent slogans like Australia’s ‘Help stop the spread and stay healthy’.
• Engaging and emotive video advertising that highlight the impact individual’s actions can have on others such as their loved ones[2]

In addition, trust and transparency were seen as important. This requires:

• Openness about data collection and the source of that data
• Information that is shared in a “fearless and transparent” [3] way to provide open, real-time information. This was also seen in Korea and was attributed to them swiftly and successfully flattening the curve[4].
• Government to consistently share information to media outlets, and for media outlets to responsibly use verified information to reduce public speculation[5].
• Use of known and trusted mechanisms for the public to access information[6], such as those already set up in Australia for disasters
  

References:

[1] Risk Manager 1

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/mar/24/australia-is-crying-out-for-clearer-messaging-on-coronavirus-rambling-politicians-told

[3] Risk Manager 1

[4] Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00740-y

[5] Risk Manager 1

[6] Risk Manager 2

The original format of this case study (including references) can be read in the source link below (p.15).