Silencing the virus? Government communication and MMR vaccination campaigns – the Australian case

IF 2.7 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Roumen Dimitrov
{"title":"Silencing the virus? Government communication and MMR vaccination campaigns – the Australian case","authors":"Roumen Dimitrov","doi":"10.1177/2046147X211014078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I analyse a series of Australian MMR (measles-mumpsrubella) vaccination campaigns and policies from the last decade. Using the Bruno Latour’s Actor Network Theory (ATN), I locate human and non-human mediators – including the virus and vaccine – in the complex pro-vaccination alliance led by government campaigners. I identify the vaccine hesitant parents – a large group that ‘sits on the fence’ between the ‘vaccine confident’ and ‘vaccine refusing’ parents – as the main target of pro-vaccination campaigns. PR literature on pro-vaccination campaigns has applied ATN to the independence of the media as network agents. This paper contributes with the problematisation of several more actors such as the health workers, medical experts and the vaccine hesitant parents themselves. Even when they are keen members of a pro-vaccination network, they cannot be taken for granted. This is where understanding of stigma, silence and voice helps. To align their group interests and discourses, government should know how to communicate strategically – including how to communicate indirectly, avoiding stigma and keeping certain internal affinities and communicative distances intact. In conclusion, I make suggestions about strategic communication in pro-vaccination campaigns. Communication of statistical risks and side effects should be central. It is a winning strategy because it establishes a more credible balance between individual rights and collective obligations in achieving herd immunity. And mandating vaccination cannot replace communication. Research shows that legislating compulsory vaccination may have short-term and relatively small effects. They are almost negligible in the long run. Mandate may trigger compliance, but it also causes anger and mistrust. Mandating vaccine has negative side effects. It punishes with economic and cultural sanctions the socially disadvantaged, who are not active refusers. It also has the opposite effect on vaccine hesitant parents. It does not weaken but rather strengthens their resistance to the vaccine and pushes them to the lager of antivaxxers.","PeriodicalId":44609,"journal":{"name":"Public Relations Inquiry","volume":"11 1","pages":"121 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2046147X211014078","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Relations Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X211014078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In this paper I analyse a series of Australian MMR (measles-mumpsrubella) vaccination campaigns and policies from the last decade. Using the Bruno Latour’s Actor Network Theory (ATN), I locate human and non-human mediators – including the virus and vaccine – in the complex pro-vaccination alliance led by government campaigners. I identify the vaccine hesitant parents – a large group that ‘sits on the fence’ between the ‘vaccine confident’ and ‘vaccine refusing’ parents – as the main target of pro-vaccination campaigns. PR literature on pro-vaccination campaigns has applied ATN to the independence of the media as network agents. This paper contributes with the problematisation of several more actors such as the health workers, medical experts and the vaccine hesitant parents themselves. Even when they are keen members of a pro-vaccination network, they cannot be taken for granted. This is where understanding of stigma, silence and voice helps. To align their group interests and discourses, government should know how to communicate strategically – including how to communicate indirectly, avoiding stigma and keeping certain internal affinities and communicative distances intact. In conclusion, I make suggestions about strategic communication in pro-vaccination campaigns. Communication of statistical risks and side effects should be central. It is a winning strategy because it establishes a more credible balance between individual rights and collective obligations in achieving herd immunity. And mandating vaccination cannot replace communication. Research shows that legislating compulsory vaccination may have short-term and relatively small effects. They are almost negligible in the long run. Mandate may trigger compliance, but it also causes anger and mistrust. Mandating vaccine has negative side effects. It punishes with economic and cultural sanctions the socially disadvantaged, who are not active refusers. It also has the opposite effect on vaccine hesitant parents. It does not weaken but rather strengthens their resistance to the vaccine and pushes them to the lager of antivaxxers.
让病毒沉默?政府沟通和MMR疫苗接种活动——澳大利亚案例
在本文中,我分析了过去十年来澳大利亚的一系列MMR(麻疹-腮腺炎-风疹)疫苗接种活动和政策。利用布鲁诺·拉图尔的行动者网络理论(ATN),我在政府活动家领导的复杂的支持疫苗接种联盟中找到了人类和非人类的媒介,包括病毒和疫苗。我认为,对疫苗犹豫不决的父母是支持疫苗接种运动的主要目标,他们是“对疫苗充满信心”和“拒绝接种疫苗”的父母之间的一大群人。关于支持疫苗接种运动的公关文献将ATN应用于媒体作为网络代理人的独立性。这篇论文有助于解决更多参与者的问题,如卫生工作者、医学专家和对疫苗犹豫不决的父母自己。即使他们是支持疫苗接种网络的热心成员,他们也不能被视为理所当然。这就是理解污名、沉默和声音有帮助的地方。为了使他们的群体利益和话语保持一致,政府应该知道如何进行战略性沟通——包括如何间接沟通,避免污名化,保持某些内部亲和力和沟通距离不变。最后,我就支持疫苗接种运动中的战略沟通提出建议。统计风险和副作用的沟通应该是核心。这是一种成功的策略,因为它在实现群体免疫的过程中,在个人权利和集体义务之间建立了更可信的平衡。强制接种疫苗不能取代沟通。研究表明,立法强制接种疫苗可能会产生短期且相对较小的影响。从长远来看,它们几乎可以忽略不计。授权可能会引发遵守,但也会引发愤怒和不信任。强制接种疫苗有负面副作用。它以经济和文化制裁的方式惩罚社会弱势群体,他们不是积极的庇护者。它对犹豫接种疫苗的父母也有相反的影响。它并没有削弱,反而增强了他们对疫苗的抵抗力,并将他们推向更大的抗疫苗人群。
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
Public Relations Inquiry
Public Relations Inquiry COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Public Relations Inquiry is an international, peer-reviewed journal for conceptual, reflexive and critical discussion on public relations, supporting debates on new ways of thinking about public relations in social, cultural and political contexts, in order to improve understanding of its work and effects beyond the purely organisational realm. We interpret public relations in a broad sense, recognising the influence of public relations practices on the many forms of contemporary strategic, promotional communication initiated by organisations, institutions and individuals. The practice of public relations arises at points of societal and organisational change and transformation, affecting many aspects of political, economic, social and cultural life. Reflecting this, we aim to mobilize research that speaks to a scholars in diverse fields and welcome submissions from any area that speak to the purpose of the journal, including (but not only) public relations, organizational communication, media and journalism studies, cultural studies, anthropology, political communication, sociology, organizational studies, development communication, migration studies, visual communication, management and marketing, digital media and data studies. We actively seek contributions that can extend the range of perspectives used to understand public relations, its role in societal change and continuity, and its impact on cultural and political life. We particularly welcome multi-disciplinary debate about the communication practices that shape major human concerns, including: globalisation, politics, and public relations in international communication migration, refugees, displaced populations terrorism, public diplomacy public and corporate governance diversity and cultural impacts of PR the natural and built environments Communication, space and place The development and practices of major industries such as health, food, sport, tourism, technology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信