From risks to catastrophes: How Chinese Newspapers framed the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in its early stage

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Risk & Society Pub Date : 2021-03-19 DOI:10.1080/13698575.2021.1901859
Di Wang, Zhifei Mao
{"title":"From risks to catastrophes: How Chinese Newspapers framed the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in its early stage","authors":"Di Wang, Zhifei Mao","doi":"10.1080/13698575.2021.1901859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Beck identified delocalisation, uncalculability and non-compensability as three characteristics of modern risk, the recognition of which lies at the core of transforming insubstantial risks into urgent catastrophes. This study aimed to empirically test and enrich Beck’s theory by examining how the Chinese media framed COVID-19 during the first month of the pandemic’s outbreak, a critical period for the media’s staging of risk. We observed that the usage of the consequences and treatment responsibility frames lies at the core of transforming COVID-19 from a risk to a catastrophe. Initially, journalists framed the virus as conquerable at a local level, with calculable consequences and compensable solutions. In the second phase, after the central government and national health experts stepped in, journalists admitted that COVID-19 was uncontrollable at a local level, starting to transform the risk into a national catastrophe, and called for enhanced solutions to controlling the spread of the virus. In the third phase, journalists started to transform the local catastrophe into a global crisis, referring to the global community as an information source. By building a bridge between risk theory and framing theory, we found that, in the case of COVID-19, delocalisation, incalculability, and non-compensability were crucial factors in risk virtualisation. We argue that the different usage of the consequences and treatment responsibility frames can either prevent the transformation of a risk into a catastrophe or facilitate this transformation process.","PeriodicalId":47341,"journal":{"name":"Health Risk & Society","volume":"46 1","pages":"93 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Risk & Society","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698575.2021.1901859","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Beck identified delocalisation, uncalculability and non-compensability as three characteristics of modern risk, the recognition of which lies at the core of transforming insubstantial risks into urgent catastrophes. This study aimed to empirically test and enrich Beck’s theory by examining how the Chinese media framed COVID-19 during the first month of the pandemic’s outbreak, a critical period for the media’s staging of risk. We observed that the usage of the consequences and treatment responsibility frames lies at the core of transforming COVID-19 from a risk to a catastrophe. Initially, journalists framed the virus as conquerable at a local level, with calculable consequences and compensable solutions. In the second phase, after the central government and national health experts stepped in, journalists admitted that COVID-19 was uncontrollable at a local level, starting to transform the risk into a national catastrophe, and called for enhanced solutions to controlling the spread of the virus. In the third phase, journalists started to transform the local catastrophe into a global crisis, referring to the global community as an information source. By building a bridge between risk theory and framing theory, we found that, in the case of COVID-19, delocalisation, incalculability, and non-compensability were crucial factors in risk virtualisation. We argue that the different usage of the consequences and treatment responsibility frames can either prevent the transformation of a risk into a catastrophe or facilitate this transformation process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从风险到灾难:中国报纸如何在早期阶段描绘2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)
贝克认为,脱域性、不可计算性和不可补偿性是现代风险的三个特征,对这些特征的认识是将非实质性风险转化为紧急灾难的核心。本研究旨在通过考察中国媒体在疫情爆发的第一个月是如何对COVID-19进行描述的,这是媒体对风险分期的关键时期,从而对Beck的理论进行实证检验和丰富。我们注意到,使用后果和治疗责任框架是将COVID-19从风险转变为灾难的核心。最初,记者们认为这种病毒在地方层面上是可以征服的,具有可计算的后果和可补偿的解决方案。在第二阶段,在中央政府和国家卫生专家介入后,记者们承认新冠肺炎在地方层面无法控制,开始将风险转化为国家灾难,并呼吁加强控制病毒传播的解决方案。在第三阶段,记者开始将局部灾难转化为全球危机,将全球社区作为信息来源。通过在风险理论和框架理论之间搭建桥梁,我们发现,在COVID-19的情况下,非本地化、不可计算性和不可补偿性是风险虚拟化的关键因素。我们认为,后果和处理责任框架的不同使用既可以防止风险转化为灾难,也可以促进这种转化过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Health Risk & Society is an international scholarly journal devoted to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the social processes which influence the ways in which health risks are taken, communicated, assessed and managed. Public awareness of risk is associated with the development of high profile media debates about specific risks. Although risk issues arise in a variety of areas, such as technological usage and the environment, they are particularly evident in health. Not only is health a major issue of personal and collective concern, but failure to effectively assess and manage risk is likely to result in health problems.
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for mental health and wellness: children’s perspectives from five Majority World Countries The role of trust in government and risk perception in adherence to COVID-19 prevention measures: survey findings among young people in Luxembourg Reassessing social trust: gossip, self-policing, and Covid-19 risk communication in Norway Organisational learning, or organised irresponsibility? Risk, opacity and lesson learning about mental health related deaths The “risk object” of cannabis edibles: perspectives from young adults in Canada
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1