Symbolic Interaction - 2020 - Altheide - Pandemic in The Time of Trump Digital Media Logic and Deadly Politics

EDITOR’S INVITATION
Pandemic in the Time of Trump: Digital Media

Logic and Deadly Politics
David L. Altheide
Arizona State University, USA
This paper examines the power of a mediatized President to use

reflexive propaganda—the rules and assumptions of digital media—to
define a public health crisis. During the 2020 coronavirus pandemic,
President Trump engaged in attention-based politics, or the use of
media to draw attention of the largest audience to himself, at the
expense of an efficient response to a major public health crisis. The
repetitive tweets, with a common form—vulgar and combative lan-
guage, usually against journalists—converted Donald Trump into a
digital meme and enabled the President to dwell on his distorted
accomplishments and TV ratings, to downplay health risks, and initially
define the lethal virus as a benign hoax.
Keywords: media logic, reflexive propaganda, attention-based politics,
Covid-19, President trump, meme
President Trump is a ratings hit. Since reviving the daily White House briefing
Mr. Trump and his coronavirus updates have attracted an average audience of
8.5 million on cable news, roughly the viewership of the season finale of “The
Bachelor.” Numbers are continuing to rise …
(Tweet by President Trump; March 29, 2020)
Sociologists argue that social definitions influence perceptions and actions by indi-
viduals and social institutions (Berger and Luckmann 1967; Blumer 1969). Indeed,
it may be said that power is (at least in part) the ability to define situations. Our
media age creates many opportunities for claimsmakers to promote and negotiate
how we should define and treat problems and issues (Best 1995). The mass media
and social media help shape audiences’ meanings and interpretation of events and
issues. Analyses of media coverage of social issues, crime, wars, natural disasters,
and pandemics suggest the importance of understanding how media logic promotes
the widespread adoption of media criteria and formats, or mediatization of public
life (Altheide and Snow 1979; Doveling and Knorr 2018; Ferrell, Hayward, and
Direct all correspondence to David Altheide, Regents’ Professor Emeritus, Arizona State University,
707 S. Sierra Ave., Unit 30, Solana Beach, CA 92075; e-mail: david.altheide@asu.edu.
Symbolic Interaction, Vol. 43, Issue 3, pp. 514–540, ISSN: 0195-6086 print/1533-8665 online.
© 2020 Society for the Study of Symbolic Interaction. All rights reserved.
DOI: 10.1002/SYMB.501
15338665, 2020, 3, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/symb.501 by Cochrane Netherlands, Wiley Online Library on [31/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Pandemic in the Time of Trump 515
Young 2015; Hepp 2013; Hjarvard 2013). The expanded use of social media also
permits politicians-as-actors to self-promote themselves with political drama and
attention-based politics (Merkovity 2017).
Attention-based politics describes the process in which politicians use their com-
munication to draw the attention of the biggest possible crowd of the audience
(voters) to themselves or to the themes they propose in the multitude of informa-
tion or news flows. (Merkovity 2017)
Digital media provide unique opportunities for self-promotion by avoiding con-

ventional media with journalists and editors. Actions by powerful decision makers
like the President of the United States, who commands media attention and loyalty
for his brand of ideological framing, can promote policies that are contrary to pub-
lic health and interests. Analysis of hundreds of news reports, internet postings, and
President Trump’s tweets demonstrates how playing to a cultivated audience that
thrives on distorted information can be consequential.
This paper examines how mediated digital communication, when used for
attention-based politics, affects the process of defining the situation, and how that
is sustained for selected audiences despite ample disconfirming information. In
order to clarify how the social construction of reality and the ability to define a
situation of national significance can be shaped by digital media, this project focuses
on communications by, and on behalf of, President Donald Trump during a portion
of the 2020 pandemic crisis, from December, 2019, to the end of May, 2020, when
U.S. deaths topped 100,000. His definition that the coronavirus was not significant
and “would go away” slowed the inept U.S. response and cost 36,000–54,000 lives
(Associated Press 2020b). I argue that President Trump’s promotion of the politics
of fear and his use of digital media—especially Twitter—effectively transformed his
persona into a meme recognized and understood by supporters and detractors alike.
For many supporters, the President’s identity symbolized moral support for their
contested status and legitimacy that they viewed as being under attack and ridiculed
by political elites (Silva 2019b). Some analysts argue that the President’s attacks on
minority groups, treaties, and governmental programs and agencies tapped into their
(his supporters’) disparaged status by affirming the value of their “deep stories”
about neglect and ridicule (Hochschild 2018). As his persona came to be associated
with digital media imagery shared by supporters, President Trump used this semiotic
connection for self-promotion and to treat the virus as an impediment to his ability
to govern, and ultimately, his reelection in 2020.
My assertion that Trump defined the situation only means that his view dominated
the policy of the United States with respect to the virus, and that his political and elec-
toral supporters, who could have helped change course, agreed with him. It does not
imply that he has a numerical superiority, but only that it was a dominant perspective
that retarded a centralized U.S. government response involving the Defense Protec-
tion Act (DPA) to more systematically intervene in the pandemic. The issue is not
whether President Trump’s definition will continue to hold in the coming months, or
516 Symbolic Interaction Volume 43, Number 3, 2020
whether he will be reelected; his definition that the pandemic was not so severe and
not the most important issue—compared to the sagging economy—is what is being
investigated. Indeed, this definition of the Democratic Party’s role in promoting the
virus more than it deserved will endure among many of his supporters even if Trump
is defeated in the 2020 election. The focus is on the process of digital media manipu-
lation and emergence of a meme that set much of the political dialogue. My argument
entails the use of several related concepts that clarify the use of attention-based pol-
itics in our digital age, including digital media logics, ideological laminations, status
contests, reflexive propaganda, and memes. These will be elaborated in the course of
clarifying the communication process that was central to defining the pandemic.
There have been numerous attempts to explain why Donald Trump received
nearly 63 million votes for President of the United States. Many studies focused
on the content of candidate Trump’s inflamed rhetoric, framing, and cultural and
ideological appeals (Silva 2019b). Interactive digital media reflect the processes that
made them. Indeed, Brad Parscale, candidate Trump’s digital media advisor—along
with several Russian and other foreign hackers—developed thousands of Face-
book advertisements that were instantaneous, personal, visual, and often negative
(Schreckinger 2017). Digital media logics are a specific form of media logic, defined
as a form of communication, and the process through which media transmit and
communicate information. Key elements of media logic include the grammar, for-
mats, and specific organizing criteria of particular media (e.g., print, film, television),
as well as social and digital media, such as Twitter. It is important to emphasize
that information technologies and communication formats are significant insofar as
human actors are interpreting and are involved in the communication process. Media
logic captures this interaction. Media logic reflexively shapes interaction process,
routines, and institutional orders; everyday life and institutional orders reflect and
reify a communication order operating with media logic. Media logic is relevant
when events, action, and actors’ performances reflect information technologies,
specific media, and formats that govern communication (Altheide and Snow 1979;
Thimm, Anastasiadis, and Einspanner-Pflock 2018).
Digital media logics illustrate how we adjust interaction modes, styles, and content
in ways that accommodate to the devices, technologies, and formats (Julien 2019).
For example, Twitter-internet writers are technologically forced to limit utterances
to 280 characters; users and receivers of tweets expect this and become accustomed
to shorthand writing to save spaces. It is understood that tweets are not elaborate
statements of explanation or justification; they tend to be evocative. This is important
for the following discussion of memes.
Memetic responses are an example of the unique social acts that develop due
to the formatting that mediates digital interactions. As asserted earlier with
regards to affectivity, memes produce evocative rather than referential biases,
indicating their “viral” success; throughout history, primarily evocative commu-
nications occurred in synchronous, embodied, co-present interactions, where the
corollary responses of our peers were immediately ascertained, affirming our

own responses and generating emotional unity. (Julien 2019)
As Markham (2013) suggests, “Performativity can be linked not only to individ-

uals, but actions of the devices, interfaces, networks or information through which
dramas occur and meaning is negotiated.” Such computer interaction posits a rela-
tionship between the sender and viewer; they are virtually present together, and
when a person relates to a message/meme there is an active engagement and iden-
tity within the tweet format (Markham 2013). We see below how tweets embellish,
enliven, and contemporize memes.
While it is certainly true that Trump’s mediated messages during the 2016
campaign spectacles (Kellner 2016) promoted the politics of fear that resonated
with audiences about specific targets of the fear—including immigrants, eth-
nic and religious minorities, working class resentment and shame, and others
(Altheide 2017)—the interactive way in which this was done warrants continued
investigation. The meanings of messages are not self-evident but are constituted
through a communication and interpretive process informed by tacit understandings
of communication formats, media logic, and digital communication platforms (e.g.,
the internet and Twitter) that were organized and managed to emphasize evocative
and visual recognition and affirmation.
The variety of interpretations of the same obdurate reality demonstrates that indi-
vidual choice and freedom played a role in Trump’s success. He did not simply tap
into existing feelings by pushing the right rhetorical buttons, Trump was actively
interpreted. Voters were not simply responding to economic conditions or threats
to their status. (Silva 2019a)
This paper examines how digital and social media formats structured Trump-
audience interaction and meaningful recognition and affirmation of the source—the
President—rather than the specific message during the pandemic. Many of the Pres-
ident’s rhetorical appeals and “ideological laminations,” or symbolic and ideological
appeals that may be stacked—like laminated beams—in different priorities (e.g.,
racism, nativism, populism), helped cultivate his persona for his followers in the first
3 years of office. Many of these were less apparent during the 2020 pandemic, where
the focus was himself (Silva 2019b). What follows is a case study of the process and
consequences of a powerful person/institution using media in defining the situation
of a global pandemic in such a way to benefit and promote himself.
TRUMP AS QUINTESSENTIAL COMMUNICATOR

The United States’ slow response to the coronavirus pandemic is partly due to
President Trump’s captivating self-promotive reliance on digital media—especially
Twitter—that are instantaneous, visual, and personal. Research suggests that unlike
historical propaganda efforts that appeal to a policy, or to a country, nation, religion,
or political party (Jackall 1994), President Trump’s aim was to promote himself
(Altheide 2017; Bennett and Livingston 2018). His messaging is reflexive of the
rules and assumptions for digital media, including familiarity, brevity, and congruity
with expectations. President Trump fashioned his personal approach to the Covid-19
crisis as reflexive propaganda (Altheide 2018) by engaging in attention-based
politics and drawing on digital media logic of Twitter and emphasized strident,
conflictual, and evocative commentary. He tweeted a lot—more than 11,000 times
since entering the White House. While one in five Americans use Twitter, and only
single digits of those claim to follow Donald Trump, the tweets he puts out are
intended to be amplified. Only about a third of voters who have seen his tweets
get them directly; nearly three-quarters learn about them from TV and cable news.
Trump told an interviewer in June 2019:
I put it out, and then it goes onto your platform. It goes onto ABC. It goes onto
the networks. It goes onto all over cable. It’s an incredible way of communicating.
(Stephanopoulos 2019)
President Trump’s pursuit of attention-based politics with digital media is now

institutionalized and he ritually performs as expected by alluring supporters. His
message and persona are joined. In one sense, he is a quintessential communicator:
His identity and presence speak volumes to those who matter. The President seldom
communicates through established formats such as press conferences, and when he
does address the press, it is often in motion as he walks to and from a whirring heli-
copter (“chopper talk”). This is by design. His messages draw attention to himself
more than the specific content (Shifman 2013). A digital media persona like Trump
relies on social media to gain attention, promote himself, and attack critics, includ-
ing those who use his own words to challenge his credibility and consistency. Jour-
nalists and critics use conventional referential syntax, but Trump’s tweets are often
evocative, vulgar, ad hominem personal attacks. To illustrate, consider the number of
times Trump tweets contained the terms loser (234), dumb (222), and terrible (204)
(Trumptwitter 2016-2020). His uncivil tweets—especially those attacking journalists
and news organizations (“fake news”)—are archetypes against dialogue and reason.
On the banks of this, vitriolic river are his supporters stroking screens to affirm or
retweet propaganda nuggets.
It is the association of his tweets with his emergent meme that is most important
in defining the situation of the Covid-19 virus and in clarifying the impact of incor-
porating symbols within digital media. When Trump was elected President in 2016,
a message flashed on the 4chan screen (an internet site), that had helped promote
the use a frog image—Pepe—with right wing politics: “I’m f … trembling out of
excitement brahs,” one 4channer wrote Tuesday night, adding a very excited Pepe the
Frog drawing. “We actually elected a meme as president.” (Ohlheiser 2016; emphasis
added). Many of President Trump’s tweets have a common form, language, symbolic
characteristics, and reflect awareness of other tweets. Media researcher Merkovity
observed that 70% of his presidential campaign tweets included attention promoting
exclamation points, with many texts in capital letters (Merkovity 2017). This routine
digital packaging that “supplants knowledge and fact with fascination and spectacle”
constitutes a meme (Wiggins 2019). Generically speaking, a meme is a cultural ele-
ment, meaning, or ideological identification that is widely shared. Memes are similar
to an urban legend with an emotional or bizarre appeal (Bell and Sternberg 2001),
but they tend to be shared via electronic technology and digital formats, often includ-
ing a visual or graphic along with a few words or a phrase. With linear media, memes
arose through culture and fashion and were spread within local cultures by social
groups, but in the digital age memes emerge and are constituted in social media net-
works as part of the ecology of communication (Altheide 1995). As Shifman (2013)
notes:
Internet memes are digital content units with common characteristics, created
with awareness of each other, and circulated, imitated, and transformed via the
Internet by many users.
Memes stir emotional responses and can create meanings and framings of issues
and events.
This suggests that the precise meaning of a specific post is less salient than the
supportive interpretation of an audience member. As Julien (2019:67) suggests:
With affectivity in mind, perhaps memes are shared and virality occurs precisely
because of a natural desire for our peers’ affirmation and the development of emo-
tional unity, resulting in both the development of in-group norms and out-group
demarcations.
The evocative character of memes takes on added significance for President

Trump. A large percentage of his tweets are in opposition or a reaction to a state-
ment or action by others. The Twitter routine and the response are communicative
independently of the specific content; it is Trump again! The postings may be
considered as Donald Trump-the-meme.
The upshot is that President Trump’s persona became meme-like. As a digital
meme, President Trump was reified and less subject to questioning or interpretation
by supporters. Digital media alter the nature and consequences of political perfor-
mance (Hall 1972; Hall and Kertzer 1989). As the examples of President Trump’s
numerous faux pas below indicate, it became less important for him to engage in
favorable impression management because targeted supporters’ interpretations were
predictably positive. Accordingly, I agree with others that Trump qualifies as an inter-
net digital meme in his own right (Merkovity 2017).
It is apparent that President Trump’s messages are reflexive of his digital identity,
in a kind of digital circuitry. However, the reflexivity is not endless and without a
referent to a reality, but is constituted as propaganda, messages with a purpose and
a target: self-promotion. Trump is a reflexive propagandist, meaning that messages
are tailored to the audience’s expectations and use of the formats and digital logic
of Twitter and the internet, as well as the reciprocal posting of Fox News. Becom-
ing a meme representing oneself can convey an open-ended meaning to viewers,
who may interpretively select a wide range of content to lend meaning. Virtually
anything tweeted will resonate meaningfully and emotionally with sympathetic sup-
porters who are looking to confirm rather than challenge their champion. Even his
detractors will process the messages-as-digital-circuitry.
The upshot is that the communication process is key. Many politicians are aware
of the logic and process of entertaining media formats that attract more media cover-
age, especially the appeal of conflict and abrasive language and actions. The President
would use the preferences and limitations of social media, especially Twitter, to pro-
mote and defend himself, his statements, and actions. The propaganda campaign
he waged during the Covid-19 crisis drew on the identity that got him elected: A
businessman-outsider-nationalist who would promote himself as the surrogate and
defender of those who shared his views—and may have felt stigmatized for their
discredited identity—and he would combat critics, journalists, politicians, and any
others who disagreed with him (Silva 2019b). Just as he told an estimated 19,000 lies
during the first 40 months of his administration, he made many false and incorrect
statements throughout the pandemic—and then would deny having made them—as
the pandemic unfolded (Klar 2020; Tomasky 2020). Since, for the most part, the Pres-
ident never engaged in dialogue with the press, only monologue via tweets, he never
used excuses for statements and misdeeds, but only provided tweetable justifications
that resonated with supporters (Scott and Lyman 1968).
With this media logic, it is the effect on the target audience that matters, rather
than factual truth. The failure of some analysts to understand this with digital media
is suggestive of the insightful comment about the mystery of dark energy by Cos-
mologist Wendy L. Friedman: “The unknown systematic is what gets you in the end”
(Overbye 2019).
Suffice it to say that this approach made the President look good to his supporters,
even as it hindered the U.S. response to the deadly virus. The attempt to manipulate
and shape information, planning, and the narration of the Corvid-19 pandemic of
2020 illustrates how some social institutions are increasingly mediated, and how
President Trump cultivated internet and digital media attention in order to promote
himself and his reelection in 2020. The remainder of this paper attempts to illustrate
this process and clarify that President Trump is valued by many supporters for his
digital persona—like a meme—rather than for defensible statements or consistent
policy positions.
THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

The United States and the world experienced a pandemic from Covid-19 virus that
apparently began in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and became a global pandemic
by March 2020, sickening and killing hundreds of thousands of people. Numerous
studies of societal and organizational responses to previous pandemics, including the
media’s contributions, offer useful guidelines, and suggest that arriving at clear mean-
ings can be important, noting that the form and expectations of the world
… acquires order as the outcome of human actions that assign meaning to events
through the socially shared medium of language and the institutions that have
evolved to manage and stabilise sources of uncertainty. New diseases are not
self-evident and do not direct the societal response. (Dingwall, Hoffman, and
Staniland 2013)
I wish to explore in this paper the impact of the problematic competition over
social definitions that can arise in a digital world.
The United States, with what was touted as an excellent public health system, was
particularly slow to recognize the emerging viral pandemic and take essential pub-
lic health steps to limit and then mitigate contagion. The United States did not take
urgent action when given the warning of an emerging pandemic in January 2020, by
the World Health Organization (WHO). President Trump defined the virus as benign
and insignificant, “like the flu.” That definition slowed the public health intervention
and ultimately cost thousands of lives. The official position of the United States was
to downplay the seriousness of the deadly virus. Paradoxically, the Trump administra-
tion used the politics of fear (Altheide 2017) to promote extensive fear of many issues
through the media, such as immigration, but downplayed fear and serious concern
about the virus, and delayed government preparation in order to not rattle markets
and hinder reelection plans. Despite evidence that the virus was spreading and that
more testing was urgently needed to contain it, the President did not caution Amer-
icans to avoid crowds, wash hands, and other safeguards, but insisted on January 22
that “we have it all under control.” In a January 28 newspaper Op Ed he was urged
by some of his former administration officials to act in the national interest:
If public-health authorities don’t interrupt the spread soon, the virus could infect
many thousands more around the globe, disrupt air travel, overwhelm health
care systems, and, worst of all, claim more lives. The good news: There’s still an
opening to prevent a grim outcome … But authorities can’t act quickly without
a test that can diagnose the condition rapidly. (Leonhardt 2020)
The presidential meme reinforced the definition of the virus situation. The leader
of the free world continued to deny that the virus was a serious problem. In one of 43
tweets on January 30, 2020, the President tweeted, “Working closely with China and
others on Coronavirus outbreak. Only 5 people in U.S., all in good recovery.” In a
speech in Michigan that night he said, “We have it very well under control. We have
very little problem in this country at this moment—five. And those people are all
recuperating successfully.” President Trump’s repeated assurance throughout Jan-
uary to the middle of March that there was nothing to worry about and that “It will
all work out well” delayed a rapid public-health response that could have lessened
the growing impact of this virus. On March 10, he promised “It will go away. Just
stay calm. It will go away.”1 The language and imagery he used would be repeated
months later when even President Trump would implore people that the virus
was real.
The President’s insistence that the problem would go away curtailed the govern-
ment’s preparation to prepare more testing, prevention, and treatment materials such
tests, masks for health workers, and ventilators to aid the stricken. Also limited was
a coordinated public health response that might reduce contagion, prevent the col-
lapse of an overwhelmed health care system, and save lives even as the virus began
to spread. Because of this inaction the United States had tested fewer people for
Covid-19 by mid-March than any other industrialized country. As health workers
were stricken and killed by the virus in several countries, doctors and nurses in the
United States and abroad expressed numerous concerns about not being safe because
of inadequate protection, especially protective masks.
“We don’t feel protected,” said Melissa Johnson-Camacho, University of Califor-
nia, Davis nurse and chief nurse representative for the California Nurses Asso-
ciation. “I’ve cried almost every day. I think if there were more transparency,
everyone would feel a lot better.” (David 2020)
Another nurse was desperate for adequate protection:
“We’re all just kind of like, ‘what in the world did we get ourselves into?’ This
is not what we signed up for … We didn’t think we would ever be in the posi-
tion of healthcare workers working in a Third World country … It’s been chaos.”
(Karlamangle, Chabria, and Rainey 2020)
This failure to act responsibly was due to a personal political perspective, rather
than a public health priority, on the virus. On February 26, 2020, the President
tweeted:
Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & @CNN are doing everything pos-
sible to make the Coronavirus look as bad as possible, including panicking mar-
kets, if possible. Likewise their incompetent Do Nothing Democrat comrades are
all talk, no action. USA in great shape!
President Trump, his advisors, Republican leadership, and his major media part-
ner, Fox News, as well as radio’s Rush Limbaugh (Jamiesen and Capella 2008), along
with other conservative media outlets, defined Covid-19 as a hoax that the Democrats
were promoting to hinder President Trump’s reelection bid (Egan 2020). Fox pro-
motes the President and his agenda because the President’s use of attention-based
politics benefits Fox’s economic interests and ratings. Just as the administration
had used media logic to promote fear of immigrants and Muslims, it now used
friendly media outlets to reduce public concerns about an impending public health
catastrophe and raise fears about a Democratic Party plot to promote anti-Trump
sentiments. The right-wing media allies attempted to drown out the public health
messages with propaganda:
The purpose of this sort of propaganda blizzard is not to inspire conviction in

a certain set of facts; it’s to bombard people with so many contradictory claims,
conspiracy theories, what-abouts, and distortions that they simply throw up their
hands in confusion and exhaustion. (Coppins 2020)
Indeed, the right-wing media denied that the virus was worse than the flu and
accused the Democrats of fear-mongering the virus.
A key strain of the president’s narrative is that concerns about the coronavirus
are being weaponized by bad-faith actors—a notion that has spawned a broad
range of conspiracy theories. On Fox Business, Trish Regan accused Trump’s ene-
mies of trying to “create mass hysteria to encourage a market sell-off” that would
harm his reelection prospects: “This is impeachment all over again,” she declared.
Rush Limbaugh has mused that the president is the target of “virus terrorism.”
(Coppins 2020)
However, the propaganda campaign began to flounder on the undeniable infec-

tion rate and death tolls. But the President’s media machine did not stop. Even as the
White House was beginning to recognize the potential gravity of the growing pan-
demic threat, Vice President Pence, who had been put in charge of the Federal Gov-
ernment’s response to Covid-19, was having selective meetings with Trump-friendly
media to put a favorable spin on the emerging problem for a specific audience:
As the coronavirus has worsened, members of the task force President Donald
Trump has assigned to combat the pandemic have reached out to prominent con-
servative social-media “influencers” and right-wing TV and radio stars to offer
them private briefings and information sessions with Vice President Mike Pence
and other top administration officials … Through it all, the vice president’s office
and communications teams on the task force have tried to minimize the noise,
calm Americans, and relentlessly laud the president’s response to the outbreak
in the U.S. The efforts to loop in conservative influencers has been seen as a way to
maneuver beyond the regular briefings to the White House press corps and reach
a different and more sympathetic media cohort. (Suebsaeng and Branco 2020;
emphasis added)
Initial official discussions about the virus did not always include public health
experts. Several meetings about the virus and public health consequences and plans
were ordered by the White House to be classified even though there was no obvious
connection to national security issues:
The White House reportedly ordered the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) to conduct meetings concerning the COVID-19 virus in a clas-
sified setting. Given that disseminating timely and accurate information to the
public is a key component in any response to a pandemic, classifying discussions
about a pandemic unfolding in the United States appears to be unprecedented.
As a former HHS official noted, “it’s not normal to classify discussions about a
response to a public health crisis.” (Collette 2020)
The paucity of informed trusted information about the growing concern of

contagion contributed to mass confusion, fear, and panic that resulted in “panic
buying” of household items, groceries, toilet paper, water, and guns. The purchase of
water is especially telling of the mediated and personal network fear that was being
generated: No official had ever suggested that the water supply was in jeopardy.
As one journalist suggested, it was as though people were buying for the end of
days.
The disarray of information led to uncertainty as many people seemed to choose

their facts based on political persuasion and their media of choice. Despite strong
statements by public health officials that the virus infections were growing and that
people—especially those over 65—should limit contact in public places, including
restaurants and bars, Trump supporters pushed the political interpretation: Covid-19
was being exaggerated by Democrats in order to discredit the President. Fox News
commentators downplayed the severity of the virus. This is important because
the reciprocal relationship between Donald Trump’s self-promotion and Fox news
economic and ratings interests facilitate what observers have called Fox-Trump
feedback loop (Gertz 2020): President Trump watches Fox, often retweeting the
coverage, and makes public and policy statements acquired from Fox, which are
then rebroadcast on Fox. The President has tweeted about Fox News and a host,
Sean Hannity, more than 800 times. Hannity has also appeared with him at several
campaign rallies. The President’s reliance on Fox, and why he watches so many TV
news programs, was explained by Tony Schwartz, an author of a best-selling book
about Trump, The Art of the Deal. After spending a lot of time with the would-be
President, Schwartz observed that
Trump’s short attention span has left him with “a stunning level of superficial
knowledge and plain ignorance … That’s why he so prefers TV as his first news
source—information comes in easily digestible sound bites.” (Schwartz 2016)
For example, on March 6, 2020, following a news conference at the Centers for
Disease Control (CDC), the President minimized the virus threat, and said he was
getting information from Fox:
As of the time I left the plane with you, we had 240 cases—that’s at least what
was on a very fine network known as Fox News … I know you love it. But that’s
what I happened to be watching. (Gertz 2020)
Several weeks later, on March 30, 2020, the President said that the impeachment
proceedings may have distracted him from paying more attention to the virus:
I think I handled it very well, but I guess it probably did (distract me) … I mean,
I got impeached. I think, you know, I certainly devoted a little time to thinking
about it. (Foran 2020)
Responding to comments the next day about a radio interview with Mitch
McConnell the President added:
I don’t think I would have done any better had I not been impeached. OK? …
I think that’s a great tribute to something; maybe it’s a tribute to me. But I don’t
think I would have acted any differently or I don’t think I would have acted any
faster. (Staff 2020)
Many of Trump’s supporters watch Fox News, so it is not surprising that several
polls showed that Republicans were less concerned about Covid-19 than Democrats:
Gallup’s poll, conducted between March 3 and 13, found that only 42% of Repub-
licans were “very worried” or “somewhat worried” about the virus. In compari-
son, 73% of Democrats expressed that level of concern … Pew Research found
that 79% of people who said they turned to Fox News for their news believed the
media had exaggerated the risks of the virus. (McCarthy 2020)
President Trump’s devotion to Fox demands constant loyalty and support. When
some Fox reporters’ comments were somewhat critical of the President’s slow recog-
nition of the severity of the coronavirus, he all but punished them by selectively
playing favorite to a minor network, One America News (OAN). At several press
conferences where he was being asked about the slow recognition of the virus by
the administration and the chaotic federal aid that was forthcoming, he singled out
an OAN reporter, who asked what journalists call a “soft ball question,” to which
Trump replied:
Well, I don’t know. I know that—boy, that’s a nice question … Thank you very
much. (Stokols 2020)
After chastising two real network reporters for a “nasty question,” and accusing
a CNN reporter for being involved with “fake news,” he called again on the OAN
reporter, who repeated the softball question:
Trump responded with a 463-word soliloquy in which he singled out three news
organizations (CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times) for criticism
and insisted he wasn’t interested in his television ratings, before noting that the
New York Times had reported his ratings rivaled those of football games, and then
portraying himself as a victim of media censorship. “I think it’s terrible. When they
don’t want the president of the United States to have a voice, you’re not talking
about democracy any longer … Thank you very much.” (Stokols 2020)
A few days later when another OAN reporter, who was not authorized to attend
the press conference, was called on for another question, the President replied:
It’s a great question … And you’re doing a great job, by the way. Your network
is fantastic. They’re really doing a great job. Please let them know.
An administration official confirmed anonymously the subtext of those

exchanges:
He [the President] often gets upset with Fox when their coverage isn’t as positive
as he thinks it should be … Pumping up OAN sends a message to Fox to stay in
line. (Stokols 2020; emphasis added)
The attention-based politics were also apparent when President Trump recom-
mended making available two antimalarial drugs to coronavirus patients. While
watching his favorite Fox News broadcast, he learned that two drugs chloroquine
and the antiviral drug remdesivir, which were used for the treatment of Lupus and
other illnesses, may be effective against the coronavirus. When cautioned by scien-
tists that there was no conclusive evidence that the drugs would work on Covid-19,
the President said “I’m a smart guy,” while acknowledging he could not predict the
drugs would work. “I feel good about it. And we’re going to see. You’re going to see
soon enough.”
Despite doctors cautioning against taking the drugs because the effects had not
been established and could be very damaging, so many people began buying the
drugs that patients requiring the drug for Lupus were having some difficulty acquiring
them. But many people were convinced that the drugs would work. Having watched
the President on television, a couple in Phoenix, Arizona took chloroquine phos-
phate, an additive found in solution to clean fish tanks. They became deathly ill within
minutes; the man died and the woman, who threw up most of the drug, was in inten-
sive care. The woman told investigators:
“Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure,” the woman told NBC.
She said her advice would be: “Don’t take anything. Don’t believe anything. Don’t
believe anything that the president says and his people … call your doctor.”
(Associated Press 2020a)
A physician cautioned:
The last thing that we want right now is to inundate our emergency departments
with patients who believe they found a vague and risky solution that could poten-
tially jeopardize their health. (Associated Press 2020a)
Hydroxychloroquine was subsequently found to be ineffective and even deadly

for patients (Armus et al. 2020), although President Trump stated on May 18 that he
was taking it, adding “All I can tell you is so far I seem to be OK” and “What do you
have to lose?” (Karni and Thomas 2020). Fox commentator Neil Cavuto immediately
cautioned viewers not to take it, saying, “If you are in a risky population here, and
you are taking this as a preventative treatment … it will kill you. I cannot stress
enough. This will kill you.” President Trump tweeted his displeasure:
@FoxNews is no longer the same. We miss the great Roger Ailes. You have more
anti-Trump people, by far, than ever before. Looking for a new outlet! (May 18,
2020)
Supporters of President Trump resisted governmental efforts to halt the virus

spread by using social distancing of at least 6 feet and avoiding crowds. On March 15,
Republican representatives Devin Nunes and Republican Governor of Oklahoma
Kevin Stitt were still urging people to go out to restaurants and support working
people. Despite some media warnings about avoiding crowds, throngs of young peo-
ple flocked to Florida and Georgia beaches for spring break. Clearly, many people
were not convinced by the Trump Administration’s ambiguous and conflicting mes-
sages about the virus. However, when asked how he would rate his handling of the
coronavirus crisis, President Trump insisted that his administration’s efforts are first
rate—a 10 out of 10. In contrast, Dr. Ashish Jha, the Director of Harvard’s Global
Health Institute told BBC World News America on March 16, 2020,
I would give them a 10 out of a hundred … By any objective measure the Amer-
ican response has been dramatically worse than everybody else … Here we are
two months after the WHO [World Health Organization] test kit became widely
available and we still don’t have widespread availability of testing in America.
Two months of mixed messaging from the government saying this is not a big deal
… It has been an abysmal failure.
A scientist at Johns Hopkins University advised “We’re about to experience the

worst public health epidemic since polio” (Belmonte 2020).
The President continued to promote himself as all knowing. As public concern
about the virus grew, on March 17 President Trump falsely claimed that he had
known that a pandemic was coming, but when asked if that was true, why the United
States had not been better prepared. He replied “We were very prepared. The only
thing we weren’t prepared for was the — the media. The media has not treated
it fairly.” Two days later he lashed out at the news media again. When an NBC
reporter noted the growing number of confirmed cases, and then asked the Presi-
dent, “What do you say to Americans who are scared?” the commander-in-chief’s
reply was,
“I say that you are a terrible reporter,” Trump replied. “That’s what I say … Let
me just tell you something,” Trump added. “That’s really bad reporting. And you
ought to get back to reporting instead of sensationalism.” (Darcy 2020)
The President then boasted that he canceled the White House subscriptions to
The New York Times and the Washington Post. Moments later, when asked the same
question, Vice President Pence gave a more controlled answer, urging Americans to
be vigilant and not be afraid.
The impact of the early stages of the pandemic in the United States can be partly
attributed to the nature, extent, and emphasis of media coverage, including digital
media, as politicians and other decision makers engaged in attention-based politics.
President Trump inspired more division in the United States by not taking timely
action early in the crisis. Numerous criticisms lit up traditional and social media,
which in turn drew more attention to the President and his supporters as they
defended and denied the inaction, claiming that more had been done, that critics of
the President were just out to get him. Conflict and disputes over what was said and
done generated and reinforced divisions between supporters and critics. Being in the
center of disputes is one way to garner attention, even if false claims are repeated,
denied, or clarified.
The overall lack of U.S. preparation for this pandemic seems astounding since
numerous health officials have been predicting pandemics since 2012 (Fried-
man 2020). Eric Toner, an official with John Hopkins Center for Health Security,
had led health officials through simulation exercises for just such a pandemic as
Corvid-19 in 2018–2019. The knowledge was there, but the appropriate planning
and stockpiling of materials were not being implemented. He explained why it was
critical for the administration’s reluctance to act on what they were being told by
health officials:
When the virus was first detected in China … a more prepared U.S. government
would have immediately begun bracing for the “inevitable arrival of the disease”
by bolstering hospitals and helping state and local governments implement the
social-distancing and other mitigation measures they are now scrambling to put
in place. “It would have been much easier to do those things with more time than
we have now.” (Friedman 2020)
An adequate organizational and expert support was also needed, but this was
slashed by the Trump administration in 2018:
The global health section of the CDC was so drastically cut in 2018 that much of its
staff was laid off and the number of countries it was working in was reduced from
49 to merely 10. Meanwhile, throughout 2018, the U.S. Agency for International
Development and its director, Mark Green, came repeatedly under fire from both
the White House and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. And though Congress
has so far managed to block Trump administration plans to cut the U.S. Public
Health Service Commissioned Corps by 40 percent, the disease-fighting cadres
have steadily eroded as retiring officers go unreplaced. (Garrett 2020)
Attention-based politics rely on social media, but are boosted, amplified, and
legitimated by established conventional broadcast news media, like Fox TV. More is
involved than the Fox-Trump feedback loop mentioned above. When this interac-
tion becomes routine, it suggests that the network itself is implicated in the actor’s
promotion. There are many examples of the President’s personal tweets being
not just retweeted but broadcast over Fox. One example will suffice. President
Trump was aware that his administration’s weakening of the CDC global health
capacity would not play well as a pandemic was unfolding so he took pains to
claim that the CDC was never up to the task and that the Obama administration
had done very little to develop testing and other procedures during the H1N1
epidemic in 2009 (Folley 2020). On March 12, 2020, the President tweeted that
“Sleepy Joe Biden was in charge of the H1N1 Swine Flu epidemic which killed
thousands of people. The response was one of the worst on record.” On March 13,
the President tweeted 29 messages, two of which attacked the CDC and the Obama
Administration:
For decades the @CDCgov looked at, and studied, its testing system, but did noth-
ing about it. It would always be inadequate and slow for a large scale pandemic,
but a pandemic would never happen, they hoped. President Obama made changes
that only complicated things further.
Their [Obama administration] response to H1N1 Swine Flu was a full scale disas-
ter, with thousands dying, and nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem,
until now. The changes have been made and testing will soon happen on a very
large scale basis. All Red Tape has been cut, ready to go!
Fox News broadcast the tweets, but did not report that fact checking showed that
none of this was true (Olson 2020). In fact, Ben Rhodes, Obama’s National Security
Advisor, immediately fired back the next day and explained in detail what they had
done to deal with the H1N1 and the subsequent Ebola pandemic. Included in his
detailed explanation:
And what we did is set up, in the White House … an office that was responsible
for managing pandemics, managing global health threats that was shut down
two years ago by President Trump … And when you don’t have an office
like that, … you don’t have dedicated people inside the White House who are
ensuring that information is acted upon. When you see an outbreak in a place
like Wuhan, China, you want people in the White House who are thinking
about what needs to be done right away so that you don’t get behind the curve,
which is what happened in this White House … The Obama administration
designed a very unique response where deployed thousands of U.S. troops to
Africa to help set up medical infrastructure to contain the outbreak before
it could get to the United States … By contrast, Trump instead again seems
to turn his Twitter feed and try to do just enough to get him through the news
cycle, while not preparing the nation for what is necessary here. (Folley 2020;
emphasis added)
The intent of a political meme is to resonate with the target audience—Twitter

followers. Justifications for not acting more rapidly were widespread. One of the
most common by the Trump Administration was to deny that there was any hes-
itation to act decisively and protect Americans. The President claimed that his
action to limit travelers from China saved many lives (although at least 40,000
passengers from China arrived after the order [Eder et al. 2020]). As noted above,
anyone—especially journalists—who pointed out his previous statements such
as “It will go away,” were ridiculed and attacked in a way that is consistent
with his Presidential narrative about the fake news media. Blaming the media is
just part of the blame game, of course. It attracted a lot of media attention for
Trump.
President Trump attacked others and promoted border closings in order to counter
his vulnerability for denying the threat of the virus on the United States. There are
10 European countries with walls to keep people out. Other leaders perform in sim-
ilar ways. For example, Hungary’s Viktor Orban said “Every single migrant poses
a public security and terror risk,” in his quest to transform this former iron cur-
tain country into a nationalist stronghold against non-Hungarians; Donald Trump
denigrated immigrants’ ill-health and threat (Ayed 2019). Trump often referred to
borders and walls to play to Americans fears and to protect them from immigrants.
In a speech on February 28, 2020, he said:
We must understand that border security is also health security … The Demo-
crat policy of open borders is a direct threat to the health and wellbeing of all
Americans. (Egan 2020)
Trump branded himself a “wartime President” who, presumably, was in charge.

Many observers decoded this as a lame ploy for reelection purposes, to convey the
image that the country was under siege by a virus, but a foreign virus at that, which
he quickly labeled the “China Virus.” A presidential biographer observed that by
blaming China, President Trump was
… trying to self-preserve by shifting blame for the problem to China and he’s
trying to portray himself as a man of action by focusing on this one thing he did,”
referring to the travel ban. “He’s much more concerned about self-preservation
and self-aggrandizement than he is about doing the right thing as a leader in a
time of crisis.” (Stokols, Megerian, and Bierman 2020)
The virus was well established and spreading rapidly by March 11 when the Pres-
ident banned travel from Europe without consulting European allies. Initially, he
excluded the UK and Ireland from this order, but included them the next day. The
nonspecificity of the order appeared at first to also apply to Americans traveling
abroad. This was also clarified in the ensuing days. He then ordered the borders
closed with Canada and Mexico for “nonessential” traffic. The implication was that
foreigners would bring in the virus.
As noted, the President’s insistence in referring to Covid-19 as the China virus
basically blames China for America’s virus problems, rather than the slow prepara-
tion and reaction.
The $8.3 billion in supplemental funds for emergency coronavirus aid, which
Trump signed into law Friday [March 6], should have been requested a month
earlier, many officials and experts said. [The President declared a national
emergency on March 13.] Had the request come sooner, government agen-
cies could have gotten an earlier start to research and develop vaccines; they
could have ensured that state and local health departments had the money
and resources they needed to support lab testing and infection control, trans-
portation and lodging for people needing quarantine; and hospitals could
have stockpiled supplies such as masks and gowns. (Parker, Abutaleb, and
Sun 2020)
Despite efforts by the WHO to refer to diseases with medical and descriptive
terms rather than stigmatizing regions of the world where ailments occurred,
President Trump pushed his racialized language. During an interview on Tues-
day, March 17, the President referred to the virus as the “Kung Flu.” When a
reporter asked on Wednesday, March 18, why he used this terminology—China
virus—even though it could incite racist retaliation against some minority groups,
he replied:
It’s not racist at all, no, not at all. It comes from China, that’s why. I want to be
accurate … I have great love for all of the people from our country, but as you
know China tried to say at one point … that it was caused by American soldiers.
That can’t happen, it’s not gonna happen, not as long as I’m president. It comes
from China. (Cilliza 2020)
Several days later as reports began to appear about Asian Americans being
harassed, assaulted, and blamed for the virus, Congresswoman Judy Chu stated on
CNN that the President’s language was inflammatory:
It is dangerous for him to continue calling it the Chinese virus. He is creating

more xenophobia every time he does that, and we can see the results of what is
happening to Asian Americans across this country. (Varquez 2020)
On Monday, March 23, 2020, President Trump appealed to protect Asian Ameri-
cans, seemingly denying that he had ever intended to trade more attention for himself
for ridicule, scorn, harassment, and assaults on them.
“It is very important that we totally protect our Asian American community in
the United States, and all around the world,” Trump tweeted Monday evening.
“They are amazing people, and the spreading of the Virus ( … ) is NOT their fault
in any way, shape, or form. They are working closely with us to get rid of it. WE
WILL PREVAIL TOGETHER!” (Varquez 2020)
Part of his effort to prevail involves denying the severity of the pandemic. On a
Fox News Town Hall (March 24, 2020), the President noted that more people die
from the flu—but failed to add that Covid-19 was 10 times more fatal—stated that
he hoped to restart the country by Easter, about 19 days later. It was inconsequential
for the Fox News cheering section that virtually no health or pandemic professional
would recommend this action. And it did not really matter to the President that a
wall of criticism by other journalists and medical people would fall on his statements:
What mattered is that the appearance would draw attention and focus on the Presi-
dent, who, in the coming days could be counted on to deny that he stated or meant
or implied anything during the Fox broadcast. The President and his aides launched
many retaliatory tweets against criticisms of slow and chaotic White House state-
ments and policies:
Polls are showing tremendous disapproval of Lamestream Media coverage of the

Virus crisis. The fake news just hasn’t figured that out yet! (March 29, 2020)
… On Monday, nearly 12.2 million people watched Mr. Trump’s briefing on CNN,
Fox News and MSNBC, according to Nielsen—‘Monday Night Football’ num-
bers. Millions more are watching on ABC, CBS, NBC and online streaming sites,
and the audience is expanding. (March 29, 2020)
The President acknowledged the seriousness of the virus on March 13 then sug-
gested a week and half later that he would like to “reopen the country” around
Easter. Reports of hundreds of more deaths by members of his coronavirus team
led to the gradual reassessment of the virus threat. By the end of March, he acknowl-
edged the threat and stated in a press conference that the United States could be fac-
ing a possible death toll of more than 100,000 people (Darby 2020). Yet, he continued
to spar with officials and governors on Twitter (April 27, 2020) for his followers about
his contributions in controlling the virus:
Somebody please explain to Cryin’ Chuck Schumer that we do have a military

man in charge of distributing goods, a very talented Admiral, in fact. New York
has gotten far more than any other State, including hospitals & a hospital ship,
but no matter what, always complaining …
… it wouldn’t matter if you [Governor Cuomo of New York] got ten times what
was needed, it would never be good enough. Unlike other states, New York unfor-
tunately got off to a late start. You should have pushed harder. Stop complaining
& find out where all of these supplies are going. Cuomo working hard!
Regardless of the Twitter claims, governors and scientists warned that testing and
other supplies were not available and that states were being forced to bargain for
them on the open market, often against each other and the federal government.
With infections and deaths rapidly rising, governors and others urged the Presi-
dent to invoke the Defense Production Act (DPA) to mobilize the business and
industry to supply the much needed medical and testing equipment, but he refused
to do so until April 2 when he invoked the DPA to ask the 3M company to make
N-95 respirators, and again on April 19 for testing swabs. He repeatedly argued
that individual states should get their own supplies and not count on the federal
government.
President Trump was uneasy with the collapsing stock market and rising unem-
ployment numbers; by the middle of May there would be more than 39 million Amer-
icans out of work. Most Americans were not happy with how his administration was
handling the crisis (Santucci 2020). He wanted the quarantine to end, even though
very few states had met even a few of own guidelines for reopening, such as declining
number of deaths. His supporters were getting his Twitter feeds and reacting. Within a
matter of days, protests were held in several states demanding that governors remove
the quarantine on work and business. They were supported by several conservative
groups as well as Attorney General William P. Barr, who voiced concern that the
business restrictions and freedom of movement to contain infections were infringing
on constitutional rights, suggesting that the Justice Department might support legal
challenges.
On April 16, within 24 hours of the largest daily increase in deaths (4591), Presi-
dent Trump was urging states and his supporters to “reopen” for business—that is, to
reduce the “stay at home” and “physical distancing” requirements—tweeting states
with Democratic governors, “Liberate Minnesota,” “Liberate Michigan,” “Liber-
ate Virginia.” Mainly southern states, including Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee,
Florida, and Texas were partially reopening for business. Two thirds of remaining
states would follow despite a national increase in cases and deaths. The President
told fellow Republicans on May 8, “I feel about vaccines like I feel about tests. This
is going to go away without a vaccine.” There were two confirmed Covid-19 cases
among White House staff members, but the President refused to wear a mask. By the
end of May, there were more than 1,700,000 confirmed cases of Covid-19 and more
than 100,000 deaths, although Trump and supporters had cast doubt on the num-
bers being reported by the CDC. A study conducted by epidemiologists at Columbia
University estimated that the delay in responding to the coronavirus cost more than
36,000 deaths:
If the United States had begun imposing social distancing measures one week
earlier than it did in March, about 36,000 fewer people would have died in the
coronavirus outbreak, according to new estimates from Columbia University dis-
ease modelers. And if the country had begun locking down cities and limiting
social contact on March 1, two weeks earlier than most people started staying
home, the vast majority of the nation’s deaths—about 83 percent—would have
been avoided, the researchers estimated. Under that scenario, about 54,000 fewer
people would have died by early May. (Glanz and Robertson 2020)
The next day Trump affirmed an antielitist trope and rejected the study as biased:
Columbia’s an institution that’s very liberal … I think it’s just a political hit job,
you want to know the truth. (Associated Press 2020b)
It is ironic, but not surprising in our mediated experience, that Donald Trump
launched 100 tweets in 2014 about the Ebola virus and attacked President Obama
for not doing more to protect the American people, even urging the United
States to not permit infected American doctors to return who had been helping
Africans:
Stop the EBOLA patients from entering the U.S. Treat them, at the highest level,
over there. THE UNITED STATES HAS ENOUGH PROBLEMS! (August 1,
2014)
The U.S. cannot allow EBOLA infected people back. People that go to far away
places to help out are great-but must suffer the consequences! (August 1, 2014)
Only two Americans died from Ebola during the Obama Administration. But that
did not matter to prepresidential candidate Trump, who was becoming a meme with
several million Twitter followers. He tweeted about President Obama on October
23, 2014: “If this doctor, who so recklessly flew into New York from West Africa, has
Ebola, then Obama should apologize to the American people & resign!” President
Trump never apologized or accepted any responsibility for the federal government’s
pandemic failure.
CONCLUSION
President Trump’s pursuit of attention-based politics minimized the threat of a world
pandemic and slowed the preparation of the United States. This powerful person’s
ability to define and redefine the pandemic to his personal advantage by affirm-
ing his digital identity had severe consequences. As a reflexive propagandist, Pres-
ident Trump’s media persona was transformed from an embodied politician into a
digital meme through thousands of self-referential and domineering tweets to his
supporters. He did not have to reiterate rhetorical and ideological discourse to con-
tinue to receive support from followers. He could just show up as a visual and dig-
ital encounter. The economy, the stock market, and his TV ratings and Republican
approval comprised his compass for action during the pandemic. Once the President
underestimated the pandemic threat and then hesitated to invoke the DPA and the
full support of the federal government to coordinate a national response, his largely
Republican supporters rallied to his defense against criticism by scientists, journalists,
and other politicians. After all, the President’s persona was against big government,
science, and critical journalism that his thousands of tweets associated with “deep
state” conspiracies. This was the package, so to speak, that was represented by Pres-
ident Trump. More was at stake than simply human lives; social distancing, shutting
down business and most public institutions were not just about safety; they were an
attack on the President’s program and agenda. And they were bad for business. This
was the digital meme:
The use of internet memes in the construction of identity can also follow the same
trajectory—the sense of being free from concern with facts permeates the polar-
ized spaces in social media … our era is defined by malleable truth. The real
horror of social media is that it can provide individuals with ways of construct-
ing their own truths, facts, etc. to continue the resistance against engaging in any
meaningful debate. (Wiggins 2019)
Even when it became apparent that front-line health workers were lacking essen-
tial Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), his supporters could not condone more
federal aid because their champion was against it. So, the digital followers did not
object when the President suggested that governors did not really need so many
life-saving ventilators, and that maybe hospitals were hoarding PPE or sending them
“out the back door.”
The impact of reports about the pandemic in the time of Trump is problematic
because of the partisan nature of many news outlets that were cultivated to gain
attention by the President of the United States. The politics of fear were renewed
through the continual demeaning of social institutions, including the free press, and
the constant claim that there is an undemocratic “deep state” trying to control the
country by promoting “liberal” policies that hurt true Americans, those resentful
of losing out in stigma contests to minority groups, immigrants, and cultural elites
(Silva 2019b). This elevated the fear of Trump not being elected and led supporters
to proudly state that they did not believe anything coming from established news
media, universities, and scientific experts.
In the time of Trump, this power of mediated unreality demands our attention and
is consequential for promoting the politics of fear that build on uncertainty, ambigu-
ity, and the belief that whatever is said or inferred by an authoritative meme will
work to maintain a belief. As a reflexive propagandist, President Trump and his pro-
nouncements were digitally authorized and appreciated by an audience that expected
a businessman-outsider-nationalist, who would promote himself as the surrogate of
those who shared his views, to combat all critics, journalists, and other politicians who
disagreed with him. The President has consistently promoted his definitions of issues
over experts’ opinions on other significant public health issues such as the causes and
impact of climate change and toxic auto emissions. Indeed, even as the coronavirus
crisis was unfolding, his administration, to the glee of the petroleum industry, was
relaxing national autoemission standards.
The new rule, written by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Depart-
ment of Transportation, would allow cars on American roads to emit nearly a
billion tons more carbon dioxide over the lifetime of the vehicles than they would
have under the Obama standards and hundreds of millions of tons more than
will be emitted under standards being implemented in Europe and Asia. (Daven-
port 2020)
The attention-based politics of these definitions earned the President praise from
lobbyists and his loyal supporters, even though the foreboding effects on the public
health would not be directly felt for months or years. But the consequences of his
self-promoting decisions about Covid-19 were immediate and lethal for thousands
of Americans.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I gratefully acknowledge the helpful suggestions of Norbert Merkovity, John John-
son, Michael Coyle, Scott Harris, and two reviewers.
NOTE
1. See https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/trumps-statements-about-the-coronavirus/.
REFERENCES
Altheide, David L. 1995. An Ecology of Communication: Cultural Formats of Control. New York:
Aldine de Gruyter.
Altheide, David L. 2017. Terrorism and the Politics of Fear. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
Altheide, David L. 2018. “The Media Syndrome and Reflexive Mediation.” Pp. 195–216 in Media
Logic(s) Revisited: Modelling the Interplay between Institutions, Media Technology and Soci-
etal Change, edited by Mario Anastasiadis Caja Thimm and Jessica Einspanner-Pflock. Cham,
Switzerland: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Altheide, David L. and Robert P. Snow. 1979. Media Logic. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Armus, Ted, Antonia Noori Farzan, Siobhán O’Grady, Meryl Kornfield, John Wagner, Felicia
Sonmez and Rick Noack. 2020. “Senate Passes $484 Billion Coronavirus Aid Package;
Chloroquine Linked to Higher Death Rate, Study Says.” The Washington Post. (https://www.
washingtonpost.com/world/2020/04/21/coronavirus-latest-news/). Access: May 13, 2020.
Associated Press. 2020a. "Arizona Man Dies after Attempting to Take Trump Coronavirus
‘Cure’: Wife Survives after Couple in their 60s Ingested Chloroquine Phosphate, which
Trump Falsely Claimed Was Approved to Treat Coronavirus." The Guardian. (https://
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/24/coronavirus-cure-kills-man-after-trump-touts-
chloroquine-phosphate). Accessed: April 13, 2020.
Associated Press. 2020b. "Trump Lashes Out at Scientists whose Coronavirus Findings Contradict
Him" The Boston Herald. (https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/05/22/trump-lashes-out-at-
scientists-whose-findings-contradict-him/). Accessed: May 22, 2020.
Ayed, Nahlah. 2019. "Walled World: Lessons from Europe’s Border Barriers: Donald Trump May
Currently Be the Loudest Proponent of Walls, but He’s Late to the Game." CBC News.
(https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/longform/a-world-of-walls-europes-lessons-in-border-
barriers). Accessed: January 8, 2019
Bell, C. and E. Sternberg. 2001. “Emotional Selection in Memes: The Case of Urban Legends.”
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(6):1028–1041.
Belmonte, Adriana. 2020. "’Don’t Believe the Numbers You See’: Johns Hopkins Professor Says
Up to 500,000 Americans Have Coronavirus." Yahoo Finance. (https://finance.yahoo.com/
news/marty-makary-on-coronavirus-in-the-us-183558545.html). Accessed: March 13, 2020
Bennett, W. Lance and James Livingston. 2018. “The Disinformation Order: Disruptive Communi-
cation and the Decline of Democratic Institutions.” Communication 32(2):122–139.
Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday.
Best, Joel, (ed). 1995. Images of Issues. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Cilliza, Chris. 2020. "Yes, of Course Donald Trump Is Calling Coronavirus the ’China Virus’ for
Political Reasons." CNN. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/20/politics/donald-trump-china-
virus-coronavirus/index.html). Accessed: March 20, 2020
Collette, Matthew. 2020. “The Legally Troubling Treatment of COVID-19 Meetings as Classified.”
https://www.justsecurity.org/69237/the-legally-troubling-treatment-of-covid-19-meetings-as-
classified/?utm_source=CJR+Daily+News&utm_campaign=dc71a50183-EMAIL_CAMPA
IGN_2018_10_31_05_02_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9c93f57676-dc71a
50183-174328773&mc_cid=dc71a50183&mc_eid=31eb853ac3. Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Coppins, McKay. 2020. "Trump’s Dangerously Effective Coronavirus Propaganda: The President’s
Effort to Play Down the Pandemic Is Being Amplified by a Coalition of Partisan Media, Dig-
ital Propagandists, and White House Officials." The Atlantic. (https://www.theatlantic.com/
politics/archive/2020/03/trump-coronavirus-threat/607825/). Accessed: March 11, 2020.
Darby, Larry. 2020. "Trump Tries to Sell 100,000 Coronavirus Deaths as a ’Very Good Job’: The
President Once Said the Pandemic ’Miraculously Goes Away’ in April." Gentlemen’s Quar-
terly. (https://www.gq.com/story/trump-hundred-thousand-dead-good-job). Accessed: May
16, 2020.
Darcy, Oliver. 2020. "Trump Viciously Attacks NBC News Reporter in Extended Rant after Being
Asked for Message to Americans Worried about Coronavirus." CNN. (https://www.cnn.com/
2020/03/20/media/trump-rant-at-nbc-news-peter-alexander/index.html). Accessed: June 17,
2020.
Davenport, Coral. 2020. "U.S. to Announce Rollback of Auto Pollution Rules, a Key Effort to
Fight Climate Change." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/30/climate/
trump-fuel-economy.html). Accessed: March 30, 2020.
David, Eden. 2020. "The Battle to Protect Health Care Workers on the Front Lines of the Coro-
navirus Pandemic; Dwindling Supplies Increase Risk of Infection for the People We Need
the Most." ABC News. (https://abcnews.go.com/Health/battle-protect-healthcare-workers-
front-lines-coronavirus-pandemic/story?id=69625036). Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Dingwall, Robert, Lily M. Hoffman, and Karen Staniland. 2013. “Introduction: Why a Sociology of
Pandemics?” Sociology of Health & Illness 35(2):167–344.
Doveling, Katrin and Charlotte Knorr. 2018. “Media Logic as (Inter)Action Logic—Interaction
Interdependency as an Integrativer Meta-Perspective.” Pp. 133–156 in Media Logic(s)
Revisited: Modelling the Interplay between Media Institutions, Media Technology, and Soci-
etal Change, edited by Caja Thimm, Mario Anastasiadis, and Jessica Einspanner-Pflack.
Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Eder, Stephen, Henry Fountain, Michael H. Keller, Muyi Xiao, and Alexandra Stevenson. 2020.
"430,000 People Have Traveled from China to U.S. Since Coronavirus Surfaced." The New
York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/04/world/coronavirus-live-news-updates
.html?action=click&pgtype=Article&state=default&module=styln-coronavirus-world&
variant=show&region=MID_MAIN_CONTENT&context=storyline_updates_world#link-
24e75202). Accessed: May 14, 2020.
Egan, Lauren. 2020. "Trump Calls Coronavirus Democrats’ ’New Hoax’: ’Now the Democrats
Are Politicizing the Coronavirus,’ Trump Said at a Rally on Friday." NBC News. (https://
www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-calls-coronavirus-democrats-new-hoax-
n1145721). Accessed: February 28, 2020.
Ferrell, Jeff, Keith Hayward, and Jock Young. 2015. Cultural Criminology. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Folley, Aris. 2020. "Ex-Obama Official Fires Back: Trump Was Left with ’Global Health Infrastruc-
ture’." The Hill. (https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/487646-ex-obama-official-fires-back-
at-trump-obama-left-him-a-global-health). Accessed: March 15, 2020.
Foran, Claire. 2020. "Pelosi Says Trump and McConnell ’Should Not Try to Hide Behind’ Impeach-
ment Excuse over Coronavirus Response." CNN. (https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/
coronavirus-pandemic-04-01-20-intl/h_b6c8f64cfe927c41431d378c866c812d). Accessed:
April 1, 2020.
Friedman, Uri. 2020. "We Were Warned: When the Inevitable Inquiry into the Government’s
Response to COVID-19 Happens, It Will Conclude that Signs of a Coming Crisis Were
Everywhere." The Atlantic. (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/03/pandemic-
coronavirus-united-states-trump-cdc/608215/). Accessed: March 18, 2020.
Garrett, Laurie. 2020. "Trump Has Sabotaged America’s Coronavirus Response; As It Improvises
Its Way through a Public Health Crisis, the United States Has Never Been Less Prepared for
a Pandemic." Foreign Policy.com. (https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/01/31/coronavirus-china-
trump-united-states-public-health-emergency-response/). Accessed: January 31, 2020.
Gertz, Matt. 2020. "With Coronavirus, the Fox News-Trump Feedback Loop Will Get People
Killed." Media Matters. (https://www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-
fox-news-trump-feedback-loop-will-get-people-killed). Accessed: March 9, 2020.
Glanz, James, and Campbell Robertson. 2020. "Lockdown Delays Cost at Least 36,000 Lives,
Data Show." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/20/us/coronavirus-
distancing-deaths.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article). Accessed:
May 20, 2020.
Hall, Peter M. 1972. “A Symbolic Interactionist Analysis of Politics.” Sociological Inquiry
42(3):35–75.
Hall, Peter M. and David I. Kertzer. 1989. “Ritual, Politics, and Power.” Contemporary Sociology
18(3):377–378.
Hepp, Andreas. 2013. Cultures of Mediatization. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Hjarvard, S. 2013. The Mediatization of Culture and Society. London, UK: Routledge.
Hochschild, Arlie. 2018. Strangers in their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right.
New York: The New Press.
Jackall, Robert, (ed). 1994. Propaganda. New York: NYU Press.
Jamiesen, Kathleen Hall and Joseph N. Capella. 2008. Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the
Conservative Media Establishment. New York: Oxford University Press.
Julien, Chris. 2019. “Couch Revisited: A Theoretical Treatment of the Information-Technological
Media of Imgur, Reddit, and Twitter.” Symbolic Interaction 42(1):46–69.
Karlamangle, Soumyaanita, Ron-Gong Lin II Chabria, and James Rainey. 2020. "Hospitals Fac-
ing a Cruel April but Officials Hope Stay-at-Home Order Will Hobble Virus’ Spread." P.
A1. The Los Angeles Times. (https://enewspaper.latimes.com/desktop/latimes/default.aspx?
edid=fcf529b5-4424-4244-a2d5-4ba5f65ab03a). Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Karni, Annie, and Katie Thomas. 2020. "Trump Says He’s Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Prompting
Warning from Health Experts; His Announcement Drew Immediate Criticism from a Range
of Medical Experts, Who Warned Not Just of the Dangers It Posed for the President’s Health
but Also of the Example It Set." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/
18/us/politics/trump-hydroxychloroquine-covid-coronavirus.html). Accessed: May 19, 2020.
Kellner, Douglas. 2016. American Nightmare: Donald Trump, Media Spectacle, and Authoritarian
Populism. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Klar, Rebecca. 2020. "Fact-Checker Counts 16K False, Misleading Claims by Trump in Three Years."
The Hill TV. (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/479041-fact-checker-counts-16k-
false-misleading-claims-by-trump-in-three). Accessed: January 22, 2020.
Leonhardt, David. 2020. "A Complete List of Trump’s Attempts to Play Down Coronavirus. He
Could Have Taken Action. He didn’t." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/
03/15/opinion/trump-coronavirus.html). Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Markham, Annette. 2013. “The Dramaturgy of Digital Experience.” Pp. 279–293 in The Drama of
Social Life: A Dramaturgical Sourcebook, edited by Charles Edgley. Brlington, VT: Ashgate.
McCarthy, Justin. 2020. "U.S. Coronavirus Concerns Surge, Government Trust Slides." Gallup Poll.
(https://news.gallup.com/poll/295505/coronavirus-worries-surge.aspx). Accessed: May 12,
2020.
Merkovity, Norbert. 2017. “Introduction to Attention-Based Politics.” Przegla̧d Politologiczny
(Political Science Review) 4:61–73.
Ohlheiser, Abby. 2016. "’We Actually Elected a Meme as President’: How 4chan Celebrated
Trump’s Victory." The Washington Post. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-
intersect/wp/2016/11/09/we-actually-elected-a-meme-as-president-how-4chan-celebrated-
trumps-victory/). Accessed: June 6, 2020.
Olson, Tyler. 2020. "Trump Turns Fire on Obama-Biden Swine Flu Response, Defends Coronavirus
Handling." Fox News. (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-takes-aim-at-biden-over-
handling-of-swine-flu-after-former-vp-criticized-administration-response-to-coronavirus).
Accessed: May 14, 2020.
Overbye, Dennis. 2019. "Have Dark Forces Been Messing with the Universe?" The New York
Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/25/science/cosmos-hubble-dark-energy.html).
Accessed: June 17, 2020.
Parker, Ashley, Yasmeen Abutaleb, and Lena H. Sun. 2020. "Squandered Time: How the Trump
Administration Lost Control of the Coronavirus Crisis." The Washington Post. (https://
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-coronavirus-response-squandered-time/2020/03/
07/5c47d3d0-5fcb-11ea-9055-5fa12981bbbf_story.html). Accessed: May 18, 2020.
Santucci, Jeanine. 2020. "Poll: Trump’s Approval Rating Drops as Coronavirus Pandemic, Eco-
nomic Crisis Continue." USA Today. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/04/
16/gallup-poll-trump-approval-slips-coronavirus-economic-crisis-continue/5147032002/).
Accessed: May 18, 2020.
Schreckinger, Ben. 2017. "World War Meme: How a Group of Anonymous Keyboard Commandos
Conquered the Internet for Donald Trump—And Plans to Deliver Europe to the Far
Right." Politico. (https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/memes-4chan-trump-
supporters-trolls-internet-214856). Accessed: August 6, 2018.
Schwartz, Tony. 2016. "Donald Trump’s Ghostwriter Tells All: The Art of the Deal Made America
See Trump as a Charmer with an Unfailing Knack for Business. Tony Schwartz Helped Create
that Myth—And Regrets It." In The New Yorker. (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/
2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all). Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Scott, Marvin and Stanford M. Lyman. 1968. “Accounts.” American Sociological Review
33(February):46–62.
Shifman, Limor. 2013. Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Silva, Eric O. 2019a. “Accounting for Trump: The Neutralization of Claims of Racism in
the Early Stages of the 2016 Presidential Campaign.” Pp. 197–216 in The Interac-
tion Order: Studies in Symbolic Interaction, edited by N.K. Denzin. Bingley, UK:
Emerald Publishing.
Silva, Eric O. 2019b. “Donald Trump’s Discursive Field: A Juncture of Stigma Contests over Race,
Gender, Religion, and Democracy.” Sociology Compass 13(12):1–13.
Staff. 2020. "Coronavirus Live Updates: Trump Warns of ‘a Lot of Death’ as Toll Tops
8,000 and Cases Surge Past 300,000." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/
2020/04/04/world/coronavirus-live-news-updates.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&
pgtype=Homepage). Accessed: April 4, 2020.
Stephanopoulos, George. 2019. "George Stephanopoulos’ Exclusive Interview with President
Trump: The Unedited Transcripts of the President’s Exclusive Interview with ABC News."
ABC News. (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/transcript-abc-news-george-stephanopoulos-
exclusive-interview-president/story?id=63749144). Accessed: May 11, 2020.
Stokols, Eli. 2020. "Uh-Oh, Fox, Trump’s Got a New Media Crush: President Embraces the more
Consistently Right-Wing OAN, Boosting its Visibility." The Los Angeles Times, P. A6.
(https://enewspaper.latimes.com/desktop/latimes/default.aspx?edid=29c4dfec-6601-421a-
828d-97a975fe4e0f). Accessed: April 2, 2020.
Stokols, Eli, Chris Megerian, and Noah Bierman. 2020. "Did China Travel Ban Help? Trump Says
his Decision Saved Thousands of Lives. Many Beg to Differ." The Los Angeles Times, P. A2.
(https://enewspaper.latimes.com/desktop/latimes/default.aspx?edid=bf43fc5b-a214-49a2-
9717-d1e2844fb283). Accessed: March 30, 2020
Suebsaeng, Asawin, and Erin Branco. 2020. "White House Privately Backchannels Its Coron-
avirus Messaging to Conservative Social-Media Influencers." The Daily Beast. (https://www
.thedailybeast.com/trump-white-house-privately-backchannels-its-coronavirus-messaging-
to-conservative-social-media-influencers?ref=scroll). Accessed: May 12, 2020.
Thimm, Caja, Mario Anastasiadis, and Jessica Einspanner-Pflock, (eds). 2018. Media Logic(s) Revis-
ited: Modelling the Interplay between Institutions, Media Technology and Societal Change.
Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Tomasky, Michael. 2020. "Why Does Trump Lie? He Has Nothing but Contempt for the Institutions
that Exist to Keep Presidents in Check." The New York Times. (https://www.nytimes.com/
2020/06/11/opinion/trump-lies.html). Accessed: June 11, 2020.
Trumptwitter. 2016–2020. "Trump Twitter Archive." (http://www.trumptwitterarchive.com/?
mod=article_inline). Accessed: May 16, 2020.
Varquez, Maegan. 2020. "Trump Says Spread of Coronavirus Not the Fault of the Asian American
Community." CNN. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/23/politics/donald-trump-coronavirus-
asian-american-community/index.html). Accessed: May 16, 2020
Wiggins, Bradley E. 2019. The Discursive Power of Memes in Digital Culture Ideology, Semiotics,
and Intertextuality. New York: Routledge.
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTOR(S)

David L. Altheide, PhD, is Regents’ Professor Emeritus on the faculty of Justice and Social Inquiry
in the School of Social Transformation at Arizona State University, where he taught for 37 years. His
work has focused on the role of mass media and information technology in social control. His most
recent books are Terrorism and the Politics of Fear (2nd Edition, Rowman and Littlefield, 2017),
and The Media Syndrome (Routledge, 2016). His awards from the SSSI include the Cooley Award
for Outstanding Book (3 times), the George Herbert Mead Award for lifetime contributions, and
the Mentor Achievement Award.

Symbolic Interaction - 2020 - Altheide - Pandemic in The Time of Trump Digital Media Logic and Deadly Politics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Symbolic Interaction - 2020 - Altheide - Pandemic in The Time of Trump Digital Media Logic and Deadly Politics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EDITOR’S INVITATION

Pandemic in the Time of Trump: Digital Media

This paper examines the power of a mediatized President to use

Digital media provide unique opportunities for self-promotion by avoiding con-

corollary responses of our peers were immediately ascertained, affirming our

As Markham (2013) suggests, “Performativity can be linked not only to individ-

TRUMP AS QUINTESSENTIAL COMMUNICATOR

President Trump’s pursuit of attention-based politics with digital media is now

The evocative character of memes takes on added significance for President

THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Another nurse was desperate for adequate protection:

The purpose of this sort of propaganda blizzard is not to inspire conviction in

However, the propaganda campaign began to flounder on the undeniable infec-

The paucity of informed trusted information about the growing concern of

The disarray of information led to uncertainty as many people seemed to choose

An administration official confirmed anonymously the subtext of those

Hydroxychloroquine was subsequently found to be ineffective and even deadly

Supporters of President Trump resisted governmental efforts to halt the virus

A scientist at Johns Hopkins University advised “We’re about to experience the

The intent of a political meme is to resonate with the target audience—Twitter

Trump branded himself a “wartime President” who, presumably, was in charge.

It is dangerous for him to continue calling it the Chinese virus. He is creating

Polls are showing tremendous disapproval of Lamestream Media coverage of the

Somebody please explain to Cryin’ Chuck Schumer that we do have a military

Hepp, Andreas. 2013. Cultures of Mediatization. Cambridge: Polity Press.

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTOR(S)

You might also like