Comunicación política, institucional y medios de comunicación en tiempo de pandemia. Análisis del diálogo sobre vacunas en cinco países iberoamericanos

  1. Peña-Fernández, Simón 1
  2. Larrondo-Ureta, Ainara 1
  3. Morales-i-Gras, Jordi 1
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
    info

    Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

    Lejona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/000xsnr85

Journal:
Revista de comunicación

ISSN: 1684-0933,  2227-1465

Year of publication: 2022

Volume: 21

Issue: 1

Pages: 315-328

Type: Article

DOI: 10.26441/RC21.1-2022-A16 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Revista de comunicación

Abstract

The current media context is characterized as a hybrid system in which old and new actors coexist and, at the same time, compete for their hegemony in the media sphere. In this context, Covid-19 has generated an “infodemic” or information overexposure that has made it difficult for citizens to access reliable sources and guidance. Therefore, the main objective of this article is to characterize the political, institutional and media actors who have reported on Twitter about vaccines and immunization processes during the Covid-19 pandemic in five Ibero-American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Spain and Mexico. To this end, a total of 68,822 tweets from 84 accounts belonging to the country's presidents, the official accounts of governments, health authorities and their spokespersons, and the main media have been analyzed. The results indicate that the most intense activity and the informative weight have been carried by the health authorities and the media, although the personal accounts of the spokespersons and political representatives have achieved a much greater engagement. The interaction of the audiences has been mostly positive, although the most active users and with the highest level of participation have made comments for the most part negative. These results allow us to conclude that in the hybrid system, the media and institutional communication cabinets show a similar capacity to disseminate messages through social networks that generate a favorable reception, although in the case of public representatives, engagement, and also the polarization, they are much greater.

Bibliographic References

  • Aalberg, T., Blekesaune, A., & Elvestad, E. (2013). Media Choice and Informed Democracy: Toward Increasing News Consumption Gaps in Europe? The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18(3), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161213485990
  • Almgren, S. M., & Olsson, T. (2016). Commenting, sharing and tweeting news: Measuring online news participation. Nordicom Review, 37(2), 67–81. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2016-0018
  • Ardèvol-Abreu, A., Hooker, C. M., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2018). Online news creation, trust in the media, and political participation: Direct and moderating effects over time. Journalism, 19(5), 611–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917700447
  • Barandiaran-Irastorza, X., Unceta-Satrústegui, A., & Peña-Fernández, Simón (2020). Comunicación Política en tiempos de Nueva Cultura Política. Icono14, 18(1), 256-282. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v18i1.1382
  • Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317
  • Bentele, G., & Nothhaft, H. (2011). Trust and Credibility as the Basis of Corporate Social Responsibility. In Ø. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett, & S. May (Eds.), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Social Responsibility (pp. 1-22). Wiley.
  • Brunner, B. (2017). Community, Engagement, and Democracy: Re-envisioning Public Relations and Public Interest Communications through Civic Professionalism. Journal of Public Interest Communications, 1(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v1.i1.p45
  • Calderón, César (2011). ¿Qué es el gobierno abierto? Cuadernos de comunicación Evoca, 4, 5-9.
  • Carlson, M. (2017). Journalistic authority: Legitimating news in the digital era. Columbia University Press.
  • Casero-Ripollés, A. (2020). Impact of Covid-19 on the media system. Communicative and democratic consequences of news consumption during the outbreak. Profesional de la información, 29(2), e290223. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.23
  • Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS) (2021). Barómetro de febrero de 2021. Estudio nº 3309. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas. http://datos.cis.es/pdf/Es3309marMT_A.pdf
  • Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
  • Chen, Y., & Skiena, S. (2014). Constructing Sentiment Lexicons for All Major Languages. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 383–389). Association for Computational Linguistic.
  • Dahl, R. A. (2006). On political equality. Yale University Press.
  • Demšar, J., Curk, T., Erjavec, A., Gorup, Č., Hočevar, T., Milutinovič, M., Možina, M., Polajnar, M., Toplak, M., Starič, A., Štajdohar, M., Umek, L., Žagar, L., Žbontar, J., Žitnik, M., & Zupan, B. (2013). Orange: Data Mining Toolbox in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 14, 2349−2353.
  • Dredze, M., Broniatowski, D. A., Smith, M. C., & Hilyard, K. M. (2016). Understanding Vaccine Refusal: Why We Need Social Media Now. American journal of preventive medicine, 50(4), 550–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.10.002
  • Edelman (2021). Trust Barometer 2021. https://www.edelman.com.es/trust-barometer-spain-2021
  • Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411-426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x
  • Jenkins, H., Ford, S. & Green, J. (2013). Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. NYU Press.
  • Kampen, J. K., & Snijkers, K. (2003). E-Democracy: A Critical Evaluation of the Ultimate E-Dream. Social Science Computer Review, 21(4), 491–496, http://doi.org/10.1177/0894439303256095
  • Kang, G. J., Ewing-Nelson, S. R., Mackey, L., Schlitt, J. T., Marathe, A., Abbas, K. M. & Swarup, S. (2017). Semantic network analysis of vaccine sentiment in online social media. Vaccine, 35(29), 3621-3638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.05.052
  • Larrondo-Ureta, A., Peña-Fernández, S., & Morales-i-Gras, J. (2021). Desinformación, vacunas y Covid-19. Análisis de la infodemia y la conversación digital en Twitter. Revista Latina De Comunicación Social, 79, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2021-1504
  • López-Rico, C. M., González-Esteban, J. L., & Hernández-Martínez, A. (2020). Polarización y confianza en los medios españoles durante el Covid-19. Identificación de perfiles de audiencia. Revista Española de comunicación en salud, 77-89. https://doi.org/10.20318/recs.2020.5439
  • Macnamara, J. (2018). Public Relations and Post-Communication. Addressing a paradox in public communication. Public Relations Journal, 11(3), 1-20.
  • Manfredi-Sánchez, J. L., Amado-Suárez, A. & Waisbord, S. (2021). Twitter presidencial ante la COVID-19: Entre el populismo y la política pop. Comunicar, 66, 83-94. https://doi.org/10.3916/C66-2021-07
  • Masip, P., Ruiz-Caballero, C., & Suau, J. (2019). Active audiences and social discussion on the digital public sphere. Review article. El profesional de la información, 28(2), e280204. https://doi.org//10.3145/epi.2019.mar.04
  • Morales-i-Gras, J. (2020). Minería de datos de los medios sociales, técnicas para el análisis de datos masivos. Fundació Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (FUOC).
  • Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andi, S., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Reuters Institute Digital News Report. University of Oxford.
  • Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) (2020, 23 de septiembre). Gestión de la infodemia sobre la COVID-19: Promover comportamientos saludables y mitigar los daños ‎derivados de la información incorrecta y falsa. https://www.who.int/es/news/item/23-09-2020-managing-the-covid-19-infodemic-promoting-healthy-behaviours-and-mitigating-the-harm-from-misinformation-and-disinformation
  • Palau, D., & Gómez-Mompart, J. L. (2015). Calidad y credibilidad, un binomio inexorable para el futuro de los medios. Periodística, 16, 11-28. https://doi.org/10.2436/20.3008.02.35
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2010). A Prívate Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Polity.
  • Pérez-Dasilva, J. A., Meso-Ayerdi, K., & Mendiguren-Galdospin, T. (2020). Fake news y coronavirus: detección de los principales actores y tendencias a través del análisis de las conversaciones en Twitter. Profesional de la Información, 29(3), e290308. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.may.08
  • Quandt, T. (2018). Dark Participation. Media and Communication, 6(4), pp. 36-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1519
  • Roses, S., & Gómez-Calderón, B. (2015). Credibilidad de los medios en España: divergencias de percepción y caracterización de los escépticos. Profesional de la Información, 24(4), 432-440. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.jul.10
  • Sierra-Rodríguez, J. (2020). Periodismo, comunicación institucional y transparencia: aprendizajes de la crisis sanitaria del COVID-19. Revista de Comunicación y Salud: RCyS, 10(2), 569-591.
  • Sunstein, C. (2017). #Republic. Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press.
  • Tewksbury, D., & Rittenberg, Jason (2012). News on the Internet: Information and Citizenship in the 21st Century. Oxford University Press. http://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780195391961.001.0001
  • Tucker, J.A., Guess, A., Barbera, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., Stukal, D., & Nyhan, B. (2018). Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature. SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3144139
  • Vállez, M., & Pérez-Montoro, M. (2020). La comunicación periodística en tiempos de pandemia: análisis del tratamiento de la COVID-19 en la prensa europea. Hipertext.net, 21(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.31009/hipertext.net.2020.i21.01
  • Waisbord, S. (2018). Truth is what happens to news: On journalism, fake news, and post-truth. Journalism Studies, 19(13), 1866-1878. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1492881
  • Wilson, K., & Keelan, J. (2013). Social media and the empowering of opponents of medical technologies: the case of anti-vaccinationism. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(5), e103. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2409
  • Witteman, H. O., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J. (2012). The defining characteristics of Web 2.0 and their potential influence in the online vaccination debate. Vaccine, 30(25), 3734-3740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.12.039
Data source: Dialnet