Blame avoidance and credit-claiming dynamics in government policy communications: evidence from leadership tweets in four OECD countries during the 2020–2022 COVID-19 pandemic
{"title":"Blame avoidance and credit-claiming dynamics in government policy communications: evidence from leadership tweets in four OECD countries during the 2020–2022 COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Ching Leong, Michael Howlett, Mehrdad Safaei","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puad029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Government information activities are often thought to be motivated by a classic calculus of blame minimization and credit maximization. However, the precise interactions of “blame” and “credit” communication activities in government are not well understood, and questions abound about how they are deployed in practice. This paper uses Natural Language Processing (NLP) machine-learning sentiment analysis of a unique dataset composed of several thousand tweets of high-level political leaders in four OECD countries—namely the Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and Canada—during 2020–2022 to examine the relationships existing between “blame” and “credit” communication strategies and their relation to the changing severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, both in an objective and subjective sense. In general, the study suggests that during this high-impact, long-lasting, and waxing and waning crisis, political leaders acted in accordance with theoretical expectations when it came to communicating credit seeking messages during the periods when the COVID situation was thought to be improving, but they did not exclusively rely upon communicating blame or scapegoating when the situation was considered to be deteriorating. The consequences of this finding for blame and credit-based theories of government communication are then discussed.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":"115 33","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puad029","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Government information activities are often thought to be motivated by a classic calculus of blame minimization and credit maximization. However, the precise interactions of “blame” and “credit” communication activities in government are not well understood, and questions abound about how they are deployed in practice. This paper uses Natural Language Processing (NLP) machine-learning sentiment analysis of a unique dataset composed of several thousand tweets of high-level political leaders in four OECD countries—namely the Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and Canada—during 2020–2022 to examine the relationships existing between “blame” and “credit” communication strategies and their relation to the changing severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, both in an objective and subjective sense. In general, the study suggests that during this high-impact, long-lasting, and waxing and waning crisis, political leaders acted in accordance with theoretical expectations when it came to communicating credit seeking messages during the periods when the COVID situation was thought to be improving, but they did not exclusively rely upon communicating blame or scapegoating when the situation was considered to be deteriorating. The consequences of this finding for blame and credit-based theories of government communication are then discussed.
期刊介绍:
Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.