COMMUNICATION LAPSES DURING COVID-19

Introduction:

Trust, transparency, timeliness, empathy with the people are the principles of
risk communication during pandemics that the WHO devised together in the
aftermath of SARS in 2003. After two decades, these communication principles
have been put to an uncommon test by a pandemic like COVID, which was not
seen by the world since the Spanish Flu of 1918. The provision of reliable,
timely and regular information in a language that people understand, via
dedicated channels, enables people to make decisions and adopt positive
behaviours to protect themselves and their loved ones from diseases such as
Covid-19. Information is the most vital resource to allow people to make well-
versed decisions on how to take care of themselves, their health and to prevent
rumours and misinformation.

Reasons:

 Communication during COVID-19 is very crucial whether from the

government to people or from media to people or people to people or
doctor to patient or within families and so on.
 Effective communication indicates the importance of content, accuracy,
comprehensive signs, symbols, language, culture, and semiotic rules. 
 The impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable groups would rely in part on the
quality of communication regarding health risk and danger.
 The essential factor in preventing the spread of the COVID-19 is to
empower people with the right information.
 It emphasizes the serious missteps made by the public health official in
many countries.
 This pandemic provides an object lesson in "how and what" to
communicate in a way that people recognise the nature or the impact of
the threat and to act in ways to reduce the risks.

Case summary:

On December 31, Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China reported a

cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan. A novel Corona Virus was eventually
identified. WHO took 4 days to communicate first cases of COVID-19. On
January 4th, WHO reported on Social media that there was a cluster of
pneumonia cases with no deaths in Wuhan. On January 5th, WHO published the
first disease outbreak news on the new virus. Later China published the genetic
sequence of the virus identified, COVID-19.
The WHO's way of handling communication about COVID-19 has shown how
communicating risk can become risky communication. The WHO has various
communication platforms based on the 2005 International Health Regulations.
There are different alternatives, and informal communication channels,
including accounts on social media handles like Facebook, Instagram and
Twitter. In the first days of the COVID, the WHO communicated over Twitter
which goes against the accepted communication plan in the 2005 IHR.
USA:
During the governmental acknowledgement to COVID‐19, media in the United
States frequently detailed tensions between the president's office and prime
federal health advisors on how to evaluate and respond to the COVID‐19
situation. As governmental power rises during national public health
emergencies, effective government communication becomes increasingly
essential for combating pandemics and stabilizing society. Effective
government communication performs a significant role in informing key
general audiences about impending threats and best practices to minimize harm
during emergencies.
Suppose government leaders do not communicate effectively in response to
local, national, and global public health threats. In that case, society
unavoidably becomes chaotic and anarchical as people experience fear and
instability due to limited reliable information and recommendations for
responding meaningfully to the crisis. It appears that many of these kinds of
government communication failures have occurred during government
responses to the COVID‐19 pandemic throughout the world.
Trump’s Responses to COVID:
Trump's statements and responses created even more inconsistency. In the
initial stages, he was all praises for the China government for their way of
handling the virus.
Here are a few contradictory statements made by President Trump regarding the
COVID-19:
"I think the virus is going to be—it's going to be fine",
"Looks like, by April, you know in theory when it gets a little warmer, it
miraculously goes away."
"This is a flu. This is like a flu."
"The United States… has, as of now, only 129 cases… and 11 deaths. We are
working very hard to keep these numbers as low as possible!"
"You have to be calm. It'll go away."
"This is a very contagious virus. It's incredible. But it's something that we have
tremendous control over."
"I felt like it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic."
"Unfortunately, the enemy is death. It's death. A lot of people are dying. So, it's
very unpleasant." With these types of statements, Trump created massive
confusion among the public.
India:
As India fights with COVID-19, a widespread belief is that the disease purely
drives the crisis. However, the truth is that chaotic, and often disempowering
communication, has provided equally to our present predicament. The
government should also have started a media engagement strategy,
accompanying with a multilingual, information campaign on every perspective
of the crisis. The response should have been communicated in precise detail to
the implementers, the media and the public. The way India reacts to COVID-19
has extensive implications for the rest of the world. Creating and building trust
with the people was incorporated in the guidelines because if people did not
trust the government, they were unlikely to listen to public health guidance
coming from those in authority. As the virus has spread in India, the
communication principles appear to have fallen by the wayside. Since January,
when COVID-19 was first identified as a global threat, the Indian government
has communicated with the people in two ways. The most attention-catching
have been two televised speeches by Prime Minister Narendra Modi made
towards the end of March. It was the time when the number of cases was
climbing up, and it is becoming evident that India will be facing a potential
explosion in the number of cases. In the first address on March 19, 2020 PM
called for a people's Curfew from 7 am to 9 pm when the public was asked to
stay at home, and all the transportation forms and shops were shut down. No
clear information was given, except for a mention that social distancing was
extremely significant. The outcome of a lack of transparency in communicating
the rationale behind this one-day lockdown became clear the day of the one-day
Curfew at 5 pm when PM Modi had requested people to reach out on their
balconies and clap aloud with whatever articles were at hand to show
gratefulness for health care workers. Since the reason for this one-day Curfew
had not been precisely communicated, people began coming out of their homes
onto the streets and joined eager gatherings of clapping and cheering people. A
theory that the real purpose for clapping at 5 pm was to release sound energy
that would end the virus also circulated extensively on social media. But from a
public health viewpoint, it was a failed effort at social distancing. The Second
address of the PM at 8 pm is the announcement of 21-day lockdown. The
announcement lacked timeliness and transparency.
The other devastating episode is those migrant labourers who had no means to
sustain the lockdown, made plans to flee to their native places. Thousands of the
poor began walking along the deserted highways and railroads under the
scorching sun. Clearer communication revealing why people needed to stay
indoors, and how social distancing would help slow the virus spread, as well as
a clear explanation of how the government would help those in need could have
significantly improved the impact of the lockdown, as well as reduced the
human misery it caused.
Case Analysis:

 When the first case outside China was registered, WHO issued a
statement on its website, followed by a post on Twitter, but WHO's social
media was scattered, there was no clear or regular pattern or strategy. The
WHO used Twitter to communicate with the broader public, which ended
in possibly uneven access to information based on the population, health
specialists and national administrations. (Use of Inappropriate Media).
 The multiple levels of authorities (local, national and international)
involved in the COVID-19 response also had a significant impact on the
perception of crisis. (Too many Transfer Stations)
 Initially, when a common health crisis begins, the public first receives the
news usually through news media and listens to what reporters
communicate about the problem. As the level of risk perception varies by
individual, some perceive the early reports more seriously and feel it
more personally, while others perceive it less seriously. (Varied
Perceptions)
 Trump didn't want to deviate from his point of view leading to the
massive miscommunication regarding COVID. He is very rigid on his
opinions and ignored the advice of various health officials leading to the
massive spread of the disease. (Impervious Category)
 Communication between public health agencies and the public is seen as
a crucial tool in reacting to disease outbreaks, and inadequate
communication can be a factor in increasing disease spread.
 People came out to the streets and joined public gathering upon the
request of PM Modi. This is clear misinterpretation of the message. Also,
the circulation of fake messages that the sound energy could kill the virus
is the wrong assumption made by the public. (Misinterpretation and
Wrong Assumptions)
 Announcement of the 21-day lockdown led to many misconceptions.
Transparent communication required public be given time to prepare for a
lengthy lockdown, by buying essentials and completing important tasks.
With four hours to go to the lockdown, people raced out of their homes
for a round of panicked buying. (Lack of Timeliness and Transparency)
 Clearer communication revealing why people needed to stay indoors, and
how social distancing would help slow the virus spread, as well as a clear
explanation of how the government would help those in need could have
significantly improved the impact of the lockdown, as well as reduced the
human misery it caused. (Lack of clear communication).