This paper discusses the role of the internet as a communication tool during global health crises. It can be an invaluable tool in crisis management and disease control. However, the internets’ open and global character also entails the risk of conspiracy theories and other disinformation spreading rapidly. Focusing on these challenges, the Ebola-crisis in 2014 is used as a case study.
A first version of the paper was presented at the 2017 IAMCR Conference in Cartagena, Colombia. The presentation and the abstract is posted below. There is also a blogpost on this theme, expanding on an Op-ed written for the student blog Studentredaksjonen (Norwegian only).
Presentation
Abstract
This paper discusses the role of the internet as a communication tool during global health crises. It can be an invaluable tool for governments, INGOs and NGOs engaged in crisis management and disease control. However, the internets’ open and global character also entails the risk of conspiracy theories and other disinformation spreading rapidly. As such, the new media ecology can both have potential for managing “the risk society” of late modernity (Beck, 2003; Giddens, 1991), but also be an inherent part of it, furthering unpredictability and lack of control (Hoskins & O’Loughlin, 2010). In other words, social media might create or enhance risks and even crises related to health (Coombs, 2015).
Focusing on these challenges, the most recent Ebola-crisis in 2014 is used as a case study. The term “E-bolanoia” is derived from the more general term “pandemic paranoia” ((Hornmoen, 2011)) to specify the focus on Ebola and the potential electronic disruption (e-ruption) inherent in the internet Kalnes, 2009). Besides the very physical viral risk, there is therefore also a virtual viral risk of conspiracy theories and paranoia.
This paper maps this discourse, as it appeared on social media sites as Twitter (for instance #ebolaconspiracy), YouTube and Facebook during the height of the crisis in October 2014, including possible attempts of the Governments agencies, INGOs and NGOs to counter it. It also traces the interaction between online media and established national mass media in the dissemination of stories spreading fear and distrust. The concept of the hybrid media system, as suggested by Chadwick (Chadwick, 2013) captures this close interaction between established and new media.
The analysis compares the online discourse about Ebola in the USA and Norway, both highly developed democracies, and detects some striking differences. In the USA the level of accusations against the Government and other authorities was high, not only of sheer incompetence in handling the Ebola risk, but also of being involved in conspiracies related to Ebola. The data for the Norwegian case, on the other hand, indicates little distrust in the capability of the Government and its agencies to handle the risk.
Hence, some societies are apparently more resilient (Hollnagel, 2014) during periods of high risk or crisis than others. The paper discusses possible causes for these variations and future challenges related to the mediated communication of disease related risks or crises. As such, the discussion is directly related to strategies against what recently has become known as “fake news” and “post fact society”.
