‘We became sceptics’: fear and media hype in general public narrative on the advent of global public health emergency

Dr Mark David McGregor Davis

School of Political and Social Inquiry

27 November 2013

The Australian Sociological

Association Conference,

Monash University,

Melbourne, 25-28 November

Overview

• Framing the problem• Methods• Present interview extracts• Discussion

2009 H1N1 pandemic a media event

• News (print, TV, net)• Public health communication• Lived experience

Endorsement + low compliance

• Surveys of publics in Australia, UK, in early months of pandemic

• Publics agree with government advice• Felt that media advice was hyped• BUT: Low levels of compliance with advice• All this quite soon after the pandemic began

Explanations

• Complacency• Perceived severity (fear)• Health threat fatigue• Politics of fear

Research questions

• How do members of the general public engage with media on pandemic influenza?

• What are the implications of such engagements for public health?

• What do these engagements and implications suggest for how we are governed more generally?

Methods

• Melbourne, Sydney and Glasgow (n=116) – (Interviews n=57)– (10 Focus groups n=59)

• Purposive criteria– Healthy– Pregnant in 2009– Lung disease/immune disorder– 71+ years

• Advertising and snowballing• Thematic analysis

Themes• Transmediation of pandemic narrative• Hyper-reflexivity• “we became sceptics”• “you gotta be careful”

Transmediation of pandemic narrative

So what sort of things were you hearing on the news?

Natalie: Pandemic. How scary it was.

Jason: It’s spreading. People are dying. First case in Australia. First this, first that.

Natalie: It sounded a bit like the movie Outbreak. I mean it’s quite exciting to hear words like that. [Laughter] But … ‘airborne’, you know. Quite exciting. It was, it seemed like a big beat-up, but definitely there was a lot of presence in the media about it.

(Focus group, 21-30, healthy, Melbourne)

Hyper-reflexivity

If the ABC seven o’clock news said there’s a pandemic happening in Victoria, I’d believe it. I’d probably be aware that they’d probably embellished it a little bit because you have to make it seem worthwhile news to report it. It’s no use – even the best journos – it’s no use saying, “It’s a problem but it’s probably gonna be alright.” That’s, that’s not a story, is it? (Alex, 31-40, CF, Sydney)

“we became sceptics”

Always panic. Always bad news. Always more people being affected by it or a particular person who’s come into Australia who’s got it and they’ve been isolated. And there’s always a panic, you know, “any second now.” The press were waiting I think with bated breath, hoping that a million people would drop dead so it could sell more papers. And it’s just a build up of panic. That’s, that’s what I remember and thinking, “It can’t be that bad. We haven’t been warned to wear masks or anything else. So, you know, it’s just a beat-up, basically” . . . So we became sceptics.

(Peter, both 51-60, healthy, Melbourne)

“you’ve gotta be careful”

I think if media beefs-up something too much, it makes people blasé about things. And so you’ve gotta be careful with that. But then if they use statistics properly, then people can sort of make their own decision. So as long as the facts are coming through with how many cases and where, then people can sort of make a judgement on how bad they think it really is. And then that would determine how they act and whether they’re gonna be a bit more cautious about it or not. (Deb, 31-40, Healthy, Melbourne)

Discussion

• Public health advice endorsed, but, sceptically received

• Scepticism (not complacency or fear) framing engagements with pandemic influenza

• General public position themselves as critical consumers

Discussion

• Pessimistic view– Is this a more subtle politics

of fear where consent is obtained even when the public is sceptical?

• Optimistic view– Is a critical, participatory

public health possible?