Constructing (not) Trust in Covid Discourses

Q3 Social Sciences
O. Parfenova, K. Galkin
{"title":"Constructing (not) Trust in Covid Discourses","authors":"O. Parfenova, K. Galkin","doi":"10.17816/humeco322845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study is devoted to how (dis)trust is constructed in the measures taken by the authorities during the coronovirus pandemic. Using the concept of biopolitics, we analyze the reactions of social network users and their communication with the authorities. The material for the analysis was publications for 1 year on various anti-covid measures - vaccination, mask regimen, distance learning and other restrictions and comments on them in one of the official public pages of the St. Petersburg authorities. The AntConc program was used for analysis. Based on the results, we identified 3 discourses, of which 2 are most clearly represented - disagreements and resistances. They are based on distrust, doubts and unwillingness to follow the proposed measures on the part of users. It is within the framework of these two discourses that the most active communication of users with different authorities takes place. Communication is built on the same patterns - in response to questions, the authorities give template references to regulations governing specific restrictions, which does not lead to the emergence of trust and only increases the reciprocal dissatisfaction on the part of users. The discourse of consent is based on the expression of solidarity with the measures taken, and the central point here is persuasive communication by some users of others in favor of vaccination, keeping a distance, wearing masks. Since there are practically no opportunities for active and legal resistance to biopolitics measures, we believe that in practice discursive resistance results in the invention of evasion tactics - not wearing a mask, not getting vaccinated, getting a fake Quarcode, etc.","PeriodicalId":38121,"journal":{"name":"Ekologiya Cheloveka (Human Ecology)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ekologiya Cheloveka (Human Ecology)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17816/humeco322845","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study is devoted to how (dis)trust is constructed in the measures taken by the authorities during the coronovirus pandemic. Using the concept of biopolitics, we analyze the reactions of social network users and their communication with the authorities. The material for the analysis was publications for 1 year on various anti-covid measures - vaccination, mask regimen, distance learning and other restrictions and comments on them in one of the official public pages of the St. Petersburg authorities. The AntConc program was used for analysis. Based on the results, we identified 3 discourses, of which 2 are most clearly represented - disagreements and resistances. They are based on distrust, doubts and unwillingness to follow the proposed measures on the part of users. It is within the framework of these two discourses that the most active communication of users with different authorities takes place. Communication is built on the same patterns - in response to questions, the authorities give template references to regulations governing specific restrictions, which does not lead to the emergence of trust and only increases the reciprocal dissatisfaction on the part of users. The discourse of consent is based on the expression of solidarity with the measures taken, and the central point here is persuasive communication by some users of others in favor of vaccination, keeping a distance, wearing masks. Since there are practically no opportunities for active and legal resistance to biopolitics measures, we believe that in practice discursive resistance results in the invention of evasion tactics - not wearing a mask, not getting vaccinated, getting a fake Quarcode, etc.
在新冠话语中构建(非)信任
该研究致力于在冠状病毒大流行期间当局采取的措施中如何构建(不信任)。利用生命政治的概念,我们分析了社交网络用户的反应以及他们与当局的沟通。分析的材料是关于各种抗covid - 19措施(疫苗接种、口罩方案、远程学习和其他限制)的出版物,为期一年,并在圣彼得堡当局的一个官方公共页面上对这些措施发表评论。使用AntConc程序进行分析。根据结果,我们确定了3种话语,其中2种是最明显的-分歧和抵制。它们是基于用户的不信任、怀疑和不愿意遵循所提议的措施。正是在这两种话语的框架内,用户与不同权威的最活跃的交流发生了。沟通建立在同样的模式上- -当局在回答问题时提供关于具体限制的条例的模板,这不会导致信任的出现,只会增加用户的相互不满。同意的话语是基于对所采取措施的声援,这里的中心点是一些用户支持接种疫苗,保持距离,戴口罩的说服性沟通。由于实际上没有机会对生命政治措施进行积极和合法的抵抗,我们认为,在实践中,话语抵抗导致了逃避策略的发明-不戴口罩,不接种疫苗,获得假Quarcode等。
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
Ekologiya Cheloveka (Human Ecology)
Ekologiya Cheloveka (Human Ecology) Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
×
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