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

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.