欧洲的COVID-19传播管理:意大利、西班牙和英国寻求信息对公众理解效果的比较分析

Á. Moreno, Cristina Fuentes Lara, Ralph Tench, Stefania Romenti
{"title":"欧洲的COVID-19传播管理:意大利、西班牙和英国寻求信息对公众理解效果的比较分析","authors":"Á. Moreno, Cristina Fuentes Lara, Ralph Tench, Stefania Romenti","doi":"10.1108/ccij-06-2022-0063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeGovernments around the world have shown poor capabilities in responding effectively to the COVID-19 health emergency outbreaks. After the declaration of COVID-19 as an international pandemic by the World Health Organization on January 31, 2020, three countries experienced the greatest initial impact in Europe. Sequentially Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (UK) were hit by the highest numbers of contagion and death in the first few months in Europe. The aim of this paper is to assess how information channels and sources influenced the public’s evaluation of the three government’s communication response strategies.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was conducted between March 14 and April 14, 2020, during the first wave of lockdowns and declarations of States of Emergency in the three countries.FindingsFindings show particularities for the different countries, but also similarities in response and reactions of the public in the three scenarios. The response strategy of the UK Government was the most untrusted and criticized by citizens. In contrast, the Italian and Spanish Governments, which both chose to respond with the severest restrictions, attracted more support from citizens, especially in Italy, which was the first to close borders and impose lockdowns for the population.Research limitations/implicationsDespite the national differences in the preference of information channels and sources, overall, an empirical relationship between government communication assessment and media use were found in all the scenarios.Practical implicationsThis empirical study has theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, findings will add evidence of implications of the Channel Complementary Theory to the field of risk, crisis and emergency communication. The results also provide insights for communication practitioners in the public sector on how forms of information and trust in sources influence the public’s assessment of authorities’ communication.Originality/valueImplications for theory and empirical research about communication during a health pandemic are identified and discussed.HighlightsCitizens engage at a high level and synchronize their use of multiple media and platforms in all the three national scenarios.Stronger criticism is provided by online media, especially social media and online press in the different national contexts.Results corroborate that factors related to media choice need to be operationalized for risk and crisis communication research.When public health depends on people understanding the actions they need to take, the possibility of disobedience is highly dependent on trust.Compared with Spain and the United Kingdom (UK), trust in government institutions in Italy was stronger and could be explained by the higher use of owned media for information-seeking.","PeriodicalId":10696,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Communications: An International Journal","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"COVID-19 communication management in Europe: a comparative analysis of the effect of information-seeking in the public’s sense-making in Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom\",\"authors\":\"Á. Moreno, Cristina Fuentes Lara, Ralph Tench, Stefania Romenti\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ccij-06-2022-0063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeGovernments around the world have shown poor capabilities in responding effectively to the COVID-19 health emergency outbreaks. After the declaration of COVID-19 as an international pandemic by the World Health Organization on January 31, 2020, three countries experienced the greatest initial impact in Europe. Sequentially Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (UK) were hit by the highest numbers of contagion and death in the first few months in Europe. The aim of this paper is to assess how information channels and sources influenced the public’s evaluation of the three government’s communication response strategies.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was conducted between March 14 and April 14, 2020, during the first wave of lockdowns and declarations of States of Emergency in the three countries.FindingsFindings show particularities for the different countries, but also similarities in response and reactions of the public in the three scenarios. The response strategy of the UK Government was the most untrusted and criticized by citizens. In contrast, the Italian and Spanish Governments, which both chose to respond with the severest restrictions, attracted more support from citizens, especially in Italy, which was the first to close borders and impose lockdowns for the population.Research limitations/implicationsDespite the national differences in the preference of information channels and sources, overall, an empirical relationship between government communication assessment and media use were found in all the scenarios.Practical implicationsThis empirical study has theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, findings will add evidence of implications of the Channel Complementary Theory to the field of risk, crisis and emergency communication. The results also provide insights for communication practitioners in the public sector on how forms of information and trust in sources influence the public’s assessment of authorities’ communication.Originality/valueImplications for theory and empirical research about communication during a health pandemic are identified and discussed.HighlightsCitizens engage at a high level and synchronize their use of multiple media and platforms in all the three national scenarios.Stronger criticism is provided by online media, especially social media and online press in the different national contexts.Results corroborate that factors related to media choice need to be operationalized for risk and crisis communication research.When public health depends on people understanding the actions they need to take, the possibility of disobedience is highly dependent on trust.Compared with Spain and the United Kingdom (UK), trust in government institutions in Italy was stronger and could be explained by the higher use of owned media for information-seeking.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10696,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Communications: An International Journal\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Communications: An International Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-06-2022-0063\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Communications: An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-06-2022-0063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

世界各国政府在有效应对2019冠状病毒病突发卫生事件方面表现出较差的能力。在2020年1月31日世界卫生组织宣布新冠肺炎为国际大流行后,欧洲有三个国家最初受到的影响最大。意大利、西班牙和联合王国(联合王国)相继在欧洲头几个月受到感染和死亡人数最多的打击。本文的目的是评估信息渠道和来源如何影响公众对三国政府传播应对策略的评价。设计/方法/方法2020年3月14日至4月14日期间,在这三个国家的第一波封锁和宣布紧急状态期间,进行了一项在线调查。调查结果显示了不同国家的特殊性,但在这三种情况下,公众的反应和反应也有相似之处。英国政府的应对策略是最不受公民信任和批评的。相比之下,意大利和西班牙政府都选择了最严厉的限制措施,得到了更多公民的支持,特别是在意大利,意大利是第一个关闭边境并对人口实施封锁的国家。尽管各国对信息渠道和来源的偏好存在差异,但总体而言,在所有情景中,政府沟通评估与媒体使用之间都存在实证关系。本实证研究具有理论和实践意义。从理论上讲,研究结果将为渠道互补理论对风险、危机和应急沟通领域的影响提供证据。研究结果还为公共部门的传播从业者提供了关于信息形式和对来源的信任如何影响公众对当局传播的评估的见解。原创性/价值确定并讨论了卫生大流行期间传播的理论和实证研究的含义。在所有三个国家的场景中,公民都高度参与并同步使用多种媒体和平台。网络媒体,特别是不同国家背景下的社交媒体和网络新闻,提供了更强烈的批评。研究结果证实,风险与危机传播研究需要将媒介选择的相关因素具体化。当公共卫生依赖于人们理解他们需要采取的行动时,不服从的可能性高度依赖于信任。与西班牙和英国相比,意大利对政府机构的信任程度更高,这可以解释为更多地使用自有媒体来获取信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
COVID-19 communication management in Europe: a comparative analysis of the effect of information-seeking in the public’s sense-making in Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom
PurposeGovernments around the world have shown poor capabilities in responding effectively to the COVID-19 health emergency outbreaks. After the declaration of COVID-19 as an international pandemic by the World Health Organization on January 31, 2020, three countries experienced the greatest initial impact in Europe. Sequentially Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom (UK) were hit by the highest numbers of contagion and death in the first few months in Europe. The aim of this paper is to assess how information channels and sources influenced the public’s evaluation of the three government’s communication response strategies.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was conducted between March 14 and April 14, 2020, during the first wave of lockdowns and declarations of States of Emergency in the three countries.FindingsFindings show particularities for the different countries, but also similarities in response and reactions of the public in the three scenarios. The response strategy of the UK Government was the most untrusted and criticized by citizens. In contrast, the Italian and Spanish Governments, which both chose to respond with the severest restrictions, attracted more support from citizens, especially in Italy, which was the first to close borders and impose lockdowns for the population.Research limitations/implicationsDespite the national differences in the preference of information channels and sources, overall, an empirical relationship between government communication assessment and media use were found in all the scenarios.Practical implicationsThis empirical study has theoretical and practical implications. Theoretically, findings will add evidence of implications of the Channel Complementary Theory to the field of risk, crisis and emergency communication. The results also provide insights for communication practitioners in the public sector on how forms of information and trust in sources influence the public’s assessment of authorities’ communication.Originality/valueImplications for theory and empirical research about communication during a health pandemic are identified and discussed.HighlightsCitizens engage at a high level and synchronize their use of multiple media and platforms in all the three national scenarios.Stronger criticism is provided by online media, especially social media and online press in the different national contexts.Results corroborate that factors related to media choice need to be operationalized for risk and crisis communication research.When public health depends on people understanding the actions they need to take, the possibility of disobedience is highly dependent on trust.Compared with Spain and the United Kingdom (UK), trust in government institutions in Italy was stronger and could be explained by the higher use of owned media for information-seeking.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Societal impact of Brand Public Relations on gender equality: evidence for a mediation-type mechanism Empowering public relations for sustainability: examining the landscape in Turkey Effectiveness of femvertising communications on social media: how brand promises and motive attributions impact brand equity and endorsement outcomes Silent ripples: negative CSR associations' impact in non-crisis situations Online faith-holder communities in crisis: proposing and testing a dual-challenge model
×
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