Search

English-language reporting on the continuing difficulties in accessing Evusheld reflects the marginalization of immunocompromised people in discussions about the public policy response to Covid-19. Moreover, the lack of available data on global Evusheld access, particularly in low-income countries, has emerged as a key form of nonknowledge that must be redressed within public health research. Through examining how knowledge about domestic and global barriers to Evusheld access circulates, and does not circulate, within The New York Times , this paper identifies a case study of the social production of ignorance related to a key issue in the Covid-19 pandemic. Drawing on science and technology studies, the history of science and media studies, I situate these trends in the context of longer explanatory histories of nonknowledge. First, through a critical discourse analysis of the New York Times' reporting on Evusheld access in the U.S., I trace the individualizing framework evident in many articles to longstanding trends in reporting on health and illness, and to the structural marginalization of immunocompromised people in U.S. Secondly, I argue that the near-total absence of reporting on Evusheld access in low-income countries is consistent with the longstanding structural neglect of health crises in the global south. • New York Times coverage of preventative treatment Evusheld rarely discusses access barriers. • Access barriers discussed are largely logistical rather than structural. • The perspectives of immunocompromised people are rarely included in Times articles on Evusheld. • Failure to include voices from impacted communities contributes to agnogenesis. • Centering the perspectives of constituencies most impacted by a health crisis will advance health equity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a critical analysis of newspaper articles (N = 60) published in a leading vernacular newspaper about violence against doctors in India. Adopting a theoretical perspective that considers 'news as a cultural practice,' a qualitative content analysis was conducted to examine how the phenomenon is framed and presented in the news, i.e., what is problematized, what causal links are drawn or hinted at, what moral stance is taken or alluded to, and what solutions are proffered and why, to arrive at a nuanced understanding of various aspects of this social phenomenon. Three overlapping key themes emerged from the analysis, namely the narrative of victimization, the changing doctor-patient relationship, and the crisis facing the 'noble profession' of medicine. It reveals how the media shapes public opinion and attitudes towards the state of the medical profession while in turn, reflecting existing opinions, attitudes, and cultural values; the analysis also reveals missing perspectives such as the voices of the patients and the public. We highlight how the findings are not merely the dominant ways in which the rise in incidents of violence against doctors is reported and is understood in society, but how media might have shaped the popular discourse around the issue and why. We reflect on what the reportage says about the state of the medical profession and its standing in society in India. • The rise in violence against doctors in India has received much media coverage. • The coverage suggests that the doctor-patient relationship is under stress. • Doctors feel that they are being unfairly targeted and being treated unjustly. • A re-configuration of the social contract between doctors and society is needed. • Such reconfiguration is underway in some form in many countries across the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores news media discourse about COVID-19 during the spring of 2020 in Sweden, aiming to provide an understanding of how moralising discourse is employed in narratives about public health risks and responses. We investigate print news media content about the corona virus and COVID-19 during the early stages of the outbreak, guided analytically by framework focusing on the relationship between moral panics and moral regulation. We direct attention, first, to how both moral majorities and villains, i.e., 'folk devils', and heroes are constructed in the news. Secondly, we look at how visions for interventions are produced discursively in relation to such constructions. Our findings suggest that moralising discourse largely target risk behaviours and health care claims of middle-class groups. We also find that news media discourse about the pandemic in Sweden is marked by attacks on government interventions that are distinctly different from observations in other contexts. In conclusion, we discuss these observations in relation the political and discursive context, and the potential impact of moralising discourse on the legitimacy of public health interventions and the welfare state. Finally, we also discuss how our findings can inform theoretical discussions about political populism, moralising discourse and public health. • Moralising discourse marked Swedish news media narratives about COVID-19. • Calls for interventions by 'moral entrepreneurs' targeted risks among 'folk devils'. • It was different in character to discourse emerging in other contexts. • It was also characterised by traits associated with medical populism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The way newspapers frame infectious disease outbreaks and their connection to the environmental determinants of disease transmission matter because they shape how we understand and respond to these major events. In 2017, following an unexpected climatic event named "El Niño Costero," a dengue epidemic in Peru affected over seventy-five thousand people. This paper examines how the Peruvian news media presented dengue, a climate-sensitive disease, as a public health problem by analyzing a sample of 265 news stories on dengue from two major newspapers published between January 1st and December 31st of 2017. In analyzing the construction of responsibility for the epidemic, I find frames that blamed El Niño Costero's flooding and Peru's poorly prepared cities and public health infrastructure as the causes of the dengue outbreak. However, when analyzing frames that offer solutions to the epidemic, I find that news articles call for government-led, short-term interventions (e.g., fogging) that fail to address the decaying public health infrastructure and lack of climate-resilient health systems. Overall, news media tended to over-emphasize dengue as requiring technical solutions that ignore the root causes of health inequality and environmental injustice that allow dengue to spread in the first place. This case speaks to the medicalization of public health and to a long history of disease-control programs in the Global South that prioritized top-down technical approaches, turning attention away from the social and environmental determinants of health, which are particularly important in an era of climate change. • Analyzes 265 articles on Peru's 2017 dengue outbreak following El Niño Costero. • Finds that individualizing narratives are not as prevalent as seen in past studies. • However, calls for government action still emphasize short-term technical solutions. • In particular, eco-social approaches to prevent transmission were overlooked. • Concludes that this narrow view on public health still reflects medicalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]