Controversies about COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination in the journalistic media.

IF 1.1 4区医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Ciencia & saude coletiva Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-07 DOI:10.1590/1413-81232025305.14472023

Bruna Aparecida Gonçalves, Renata Fortes Itagyba, Camila Carvalho de Souza Amorim Matos, Marcia Thereza Couto

{"title":"Controversies about COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination in the journalistic media.","authors":"Bruna Aparecida Gonçalves, Renata Fortes Itagyba, Camila Carvalho de Souza Amorim Matos, Marcia Thereza Couto","doi":"10.1590/1413-81232025305.14472023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of COVID-19, controversies about vaccines and vaccination have gained prominence in the media, stirring debates about safety, efficacy and side effects This study analyzed the positioning in favor and against COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination in the Brazilian newspapers Folha de S.Paulo (FSP) and Brasil Sem Medo (BSM). This qualitative research was carried out through documentary analysis of 16 news stories selected from FSP and 12 from BSM, based on the theoretical-methodological perspective of Bruno Latour's Actor-Network Theory. Regarding COVID-19 vaccines, BSM presented arguments questioning the development of these vaccines, concerns about adverse events, ineffectiveness of vaccines, natural immunity superior to that acquired by vaccines and rumors about the composition of vaccines. FSP argued in defense of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Regarding vaccination, BSM criticized the restrictions imposed to unvaccinated citizens and defended individual freedom. FSP criticized the former president Bolsonaro's position on vaccination and defended mass immunization. The study shows that newspapers disseminate polarized perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines/vaccination. The controversy about vaccines/vaccination is related to the crisis of expertise in health decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":10195,"journal":{"name":"Ciencia & saude coletiva","volume":"30 5","pages":"e14472023"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ciencia & saude coletiva","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232025305.14472023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of COVID-19, controversies about vaccines and vaccination have gained prominence in the media, stirring debates about safety, efficacy and side effects This study analyzed the positioning in favor and against COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination in the Brazilian newspapers Folha de S.Paulo (FSP) and Brasil Sem Medo (BSM). This qualitative research was carried out through documentary analysis of 16 news stories selected from FSP and 12 from BSM, based on the theoretical-methodological perspective of Bruno Latour's Actor-Network Theory. Regarding COVID-19 vaccines, BSM presented arguments questioning the development of these vaccines, concerns about adverse events, ineffectiveness of vaccines, natural immunity superior to that acquired by vaccines and rumors about the composition of vaccines. FSP argued in defense of the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Regarding vaccination, BSM criticized the restrictions imposed to unvaccinated citizens and defended individual freedom. FSP criticized the former president Bolsonaro's position on vaccination and defended mass immunization. The study shows that newspapers disseminate polarized perspectives on COVID-19 vaccines/vaccination. The controversy about vaccines/vaccination is related to the crisis of expertise in health decision-making.

查看原文本刊更多论文

新闻媒体对COVID-19疫苗和疫苗接种的争议。

在COVID-19背景下，关于疫苗和疫苗接种的争议在媒体上得到了突出的报道，引发了关于安全性，有效性和副作用的争论。本研究分析了巴西报纸Folha de S.Paulo （FSP）和Brasil Sem Medo （BSM）对COVID-19疫苗和疫苗接种的支持和反对定位。本定性研究基于布鲁诺·拉图尔行动者网络理论的理论方法论视角，通过对FSP和BSM分别选取的16篇新闻报道进行文献分析。关于COVID-19疫苗，BSM提出了对这些疫苗开发的质疑、对不良事件的担忧、疫苗的无效、天然免疫优于疫苗以及关于疫苗成分的谣言。FSP为疫苗的安全性和有效性辩护。关于疫苗接种，BSM批评了对未接种疫苗的公民施加的限制，并捍卫了个人自由。FSP批评了前总统博尔索纳罗在疫苗接种问题上的立场，为大规模免疫接种辩护。研究表明，报纸对COVID-19疫苗/疫苗接种的看法两极分化。关于疫苗/疫苗接种的争论与卫生决策中的专业知识危机有关。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ciencia & saude coletiva PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-

CiteScore

3.60

自引率

11.80%

发文量

533

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Ciência & Saúde Coletiva publishes debates, analyses, and results of research on a Specific Theme considered current and relevant to the field of Collective Health. Its abbreviated title is Ciênc. saúde coletiva, which should be used in bibliographies, footnotes and bibliographical references and strips.