Instead, it is”an interactive process of exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and institutions. This paper argues that effective communication during a public health crisis is not merely about messaging. The analysis scope was public health crisis communications advice, as provided in the COVID-19 Roadmap to Recovery report (Group of Eight Universities, 2020). The derivation of the foundations and recommendations presented here resulted from collaborative discussions and critical analysis, based on the authors’ disciplinary expertise Footnote 3 and synthesis of the relevant literatures. The combination of insights spanning multiple disciplines has been neglected in the risk and crisis communications literature, and it is the purpose of this paper to combine these complementary fields. This paper aims, informed by the literature from the fields of applied risk communication, cognitive and social psychology, sociology, and public policy, to guide pandemic communications strategies. The paper presented here expands on the same authors’ communications guidance for the task force report. In this report, public health communication was considered central to addressing the pandemic, and it was defined as a two-way process engaging policymakers and communities. The report contained evidence-informed recommendations from a range of researchers and practitioners in epidemiology, infectious disease management, First Nations scholars, and social scientists. This taskforce prepared an independent report titled COVID-19 Roadmap to Recovery: A Report for the Nation (Group of Eight Universities, 2020) presented to the National Cabinet and Australian Government in May 2020. The public response included the rapid and reasonably widespread uptake of a range of preventative behaviours, including physical distancing (also referred to as social distancing) with a general focus on ‘flattening the curve.’ In early April 2020, the Australian Government Department of Health sought advice from a rapidly-formed multidisciplinary task force comprising experts from the country’s eight leading universities (known as the Group of Eight, or Go8). In the crucial early phase, there was strong concordance between public health advice and action by leaders. However, all government levels (Federal, States and Territories, and local councils) responded quickly and decisively (Swerrisen, 2020). Naturally, many factors contributed to Australia’s relative success, including its geographic isolation and wealth. While numbers were even lower in New Zealand-420 cases and five deaths per million-Australia’s rate stands in contrast with, for example, the United States, with rates of 51,655 cases and 937 deaths per million and the United Kingdom with 27,746 cases and 954 deaths per million. For example, by the second week of December 2020, Australia had reported a rate of 1094 cases and 35 deaths per million population. Not all countries, however, have been affected equally, with the initial response in some countries relatively successful in suppressing transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and has been responsible for a global economic downturn. We also highlight the implications of emerging digital technologies in communication and engagement activities. We argue that a diversity of community groups must be included in engagement activities. We outline how government policymakers can engender widespread public support and participation through increased and ongoing community engagement. Ultimately, the long-term success depends on developing and maintaining public trust. We argue that an effective communication strategy is a two-way process that involves clear messages, delivered via appropriate platforms, tailored for diverse audiences, and shared by trusted people. We then present ten recommendations for effective communication strategies to engender maximum support and participation. While there is no ‘one size fits all’ communications strategy to deliver information during a prolonged crisis, in this article, we draw on key findings from scholarship in multiple social science disciplines to highlight some fundamental characteristics of effective governmental crisis communication. The reasons for the differences are complex, but response efficacy has in part depended on the speed and scale of governmental intervention and how communities have received, perceived, and acted on the information provided by governments and other agencies. Several countries have successfully reduced their COVID-19 infection rate early, while others have been overwhelmed.
0 Comments
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |